2026 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings

U.S. Maritime Cases

Panamex International Shipping Company Ltd. v AAT Global Ltd. (The “CABO FUJI”) – SMA No. 4473 – 4 March 2024

ASBATANKVOY – DEMURRAGE – FAILURE TO PAY – FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE IN ARBITRATION

Panamax International Shipping sought $332K from AAT Global for demurrage incurred during a voyage transporting Carbon Black Feedstock from Mississippi River ports to East Coast India. AAT Global failed to respond to payment requests, forcing Panamax to initiate arbitration.

English Maritime Cases

London Arbitration 3/24

FORCE MAJEURE – “LAWSUIT” DEFINITION – TIME-BARRED CLAIMS – TIME-CLAUSE – AGREEMENTS ON CHARTER – ARBITRATION

In March 2022, a vessel sustained propeller damage on the way to its first load port, leading to the charter party cancellation through force majeure.  Charterers did not initiate arbitration proceedings until over a year later in April 2023. The dispute focused on whether arbitration proceedings were time-barred. Charterers contended that the one-year time bar did not apply due to circumstances surrounding the voyage’s cancellation.  

English Maritime Cases

London Arbitration 2/24

TIME CHARTER – NYPE FORM – BUNKERS UPON REDELIVERY – SPEED AND CONSUMPTION CLAIM – WEATHER ROUTING COMPANY – ALLEGED ADDITIONAL / UNAUTHORIZED PORT CALL

In a time charter dispute based on an amended NYPE 1946 form, Owners claimed a balance of hire for $79,103.27, while Charterers denied responsibility and counterclaimed for $100,000, alleging the vessel had traveled an extra 250 miles and did not meet speed and consumption warranties.

English Maritime Cases

London Arbitration 1/24

NORGRAIN FORM – CHANGE OF PORTS – CHANGE IN FREIGHT DUE TO CHANGE OF PORTS – DESPATCH TERMS – DO LOCAL PUBLIC HOLIDAYS COUNT FOR LAYTIME PURPOSES

A vessel chartered under an amended Norgrain agreement was to transport dense grains from Paranagua, Brazil, to China. The discharge points were initially Zhoushan and Taixing but were later changed to Tianjin. Disputes arose over outstanding freight charges and despatch claims.

U.S. Maritime Cases

Teekay Tankers Chartering Pte. Ltd. v SeaRiver Maritime LLC. (The “ZENITH SPIRIT”) – SMA No. 4467, 22 September 2023

EMVOY SPECIAL CLAUSE 15 – EXXONMOBILE VOY2012 – CARGO STORAGE – DAMAGES – AUTHORITY OF BROKER TO REPRESENT BOTH PARTIES – MEETING OF THE MINDS

The dispute between SeaRiver Maritime (Charterer) and Teekay Tankers Chartering (Owner) revolved around the terms of a charter party agreement for the vessel ZENITH SPIRIT. The key point of contention was the interpretation of Special Clause 15 from the contract written on an ExxonMobile VOY2012, with Owner claiming a guaranteed minimum of 90 days of storage, while Charterer contended that storage was at Charterer’s option.

U.S. Maritime Cases

Dorval SC Tankers Inc. v SeaRiver Maritime, LLC, (The “GOLDEN AUSTRALIS”) – SMA No. 4465, 7 September 2023

EMVOY 2012 – WITHHELD SAMPLES – SAMPLE CONTAMINATION – JOINT SAMPLE TESTING – ARBITRABILITY – CAUSE OF CONTAMINATION

An Owner and Charterer entered into a Contract of Affreightment (COA) for the transportation of bulk chemical products from Singapore to Australia. Sampling at the discharge revealed water droplets and cloudiness in the cargo. The Charterer withheld samples from the discharge from joint testing that was requested by the Owner to determine the cause of contamination.

U.S. Maritime Cases

Naviera Transoceanica and Products Tankers Management Company v PetroChina International (America) Inc. – SMA No. 4464, 29 August 2023

VOYAGE SPEED – WEATHER – DEMURRAGE CLAIM – OWNERS GUARANTEE – SLOW STEAMING – ASBATANKVOY

A voyage charter was made for the transport of clean petroleum product (CPP) from Cherry Point, Washington, to a Chilean port of the Charterer’s choice. Owners initiated arbitration seeking a partial final award of outstanding demurrage, plus interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees. Charterer disputed the claim, asserting that the vessel failed to meet the charterparty speed and failed to adhere to voyage orders, resulting in a missed discharge window.

U.S. Maritime Cases

Oslo Caribbean Carrier v Knowles Construction & Development Co. Ltd. (The “SEA CARRIER”), SMA No. 4463, 3 August 2023

PARTIAL PAYMENT – DAMAGES FOR DETENTION – DEMURRAGE – FAILURE TO APPOINT ARBITRATOR – ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEBT – FAILURE TO MAKE PAYMENT

This arbitration involved a charterparty for the transport of bulk aggregate sand from Kingston, Jamaica, to Nassau, Bahamas. Oslo Caribbean Carrier AS, the owner of the M/V SEA CARRIER, claimed outstanding demurrage payment and interest from Knowles Construction & Development Co. Ltd., the charterer.

English Maritime Cases / Singapore Maritime Cases

Singapore Arbitration 3/23

DEMURRAGE – FAILURE TO NOMINATE VESSEL – BREACH OF CONTRACT – MITIGATION OF LOSS – PRINCIPLE OF MINIMUM PERFORMANCE

This case involves a dispute arising from a trip charter for the shipment of coal from Indonesia to Thailand. The charterparty specified two voyages. The Owner failed to nominate vessels for these shipments, leading to a breach of the charterparty.

English Maritime Cases / Singapore Maritime Cases

Singapore Arbitration 2/23

DEMURRAGE – GENCON 1994 FORM – FAILURE TO PROVIDE CARGO – BREACH OF CONTRACT – NON-PARTICIPATING RESPONDENT – UNCITRAL MODEL LAW – COMPENSATORY DAMAGES – NO APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR

The case involved a fixture recap that agreed cargo was to be loaded in Vietnam and delivered to a port in China. The charterers failed to provide the cargo despite repeated requests from the owners. The charterers refused to participate in arbitration and provided no defense.