Stena Bulk AB v. Gulfstream Overseas (Bahamas) Ltd. (The “Stena Consul”) – SMA No. 3945, 31 Oct 2006

ASBATANKVOY -- DEVIATION -- FREIGHT -- HURRICANE -- WORLDSCALE -- ACT OF GOD -- STORM -- HURRICANE -- DEVIATION COSTS -- Owner Award After arrival in the Mississippi River for discharge, the Vessel was subsequently ordered to sail to Houston for discharge in order to avoid a hurricane. At issue is the calculation of freight and deviation costs; whether Houston constituted the Charterer’s second discharge port option as per Charterer’s Diversion Clause or did the sole disport with the Mississippi River constitute a deviation.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.