Tagged: Vol. 20 No. 4

American Overseas Marine Corporation v Golar Commodities Ltd (The “LNG Gemini”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 7 May 2014

TIME CHARTER -- INJURIOUS CARGO DEFINED -- DEBRIS IN PUMPS AND TANKS -- Charterer Award Under a time charter contract, the Vessel loaded a cargo of LNG for the Charterer’s account. After the operation, it was reported that debris could have been introduced into the cargo tanks, however nothing was noticeably wrong at the time. During the course of the following voyages, intermittent problems accumulated until the Vessel had to undergo extensive repairs. Owner blamed the Charterer’s cargo and filed a damages claim to recover their losses.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Maritime Industry News…In Brief

EBOLA VIRUS . . . Ebola has caused more than 3,300 deaths in west Africa, predominantly in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, and more recently in Nigeria. This pandemic impacts shipping contracts and as well as individual Port State Control (PSC) guidelines for vessels arriving from Ebola infected countries. In general, PSC checks a vessel’s last 10 ports of call and grants approval for disembarkation of crew and guards provided 21 days have elapsed since the Vessel’s call to an affected country. Vessels that have confirmed cases of ebola on board are placed in quarantine. Contracts treat this delay differently based on the...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Mediterranean Shipping Co. (USA) Inc. v. International Freight Services, Inc. – 2014 AMC 1442, 26 Mar 2014

CONTAINER DEMURRAGE -- DOCTRINE OF LACHES -- STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS -- DELAYED PROCEEDINGS -- INTEREST CALCULATION -- Plaintiff Award The Claimant’s container sat at the discharge port for a period of 4 years. During that time they issued 13 demurrage claims contemporaneously to the Cargo Merchant for the container’s running delay. However, the Defendant never paid, so once the container was returned by Customs, the Claimant brought admiralty action against the Defendant to recover those outstanding funds. As this was several years after the voyage (and a number of these claims), the Merchant argued that these claims were barred by laches.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Hudson Shipping Lines Inc. v. TBS Ocean Carriers Ltd. (The “Seminole Princess”) – SMA No. 4239, 28 Aug 2014

NYPE -- GROUNDING -- SAFE PORT WARRANTY -- GOOD NAVIGATION AND SEAMANSHIP -- OFF HIRE -- REPAIR COSTS -- Charterer Award The Vessel grounded on an uncharted reef on her approach to the discharge port, Makassar, Indonesia, causing hull damage, loss of time, additional bunker consumption and other related expenses. At issue is whether Charterer breached the safe port warranty or whether Owner failed in exercising good navigation and seamanship.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Agriculture & Energy Carriers Ltd. v. United Coals Inc. (The “Mardinik”) – SMA No. 4240, 10 Sep 2014

AMERICANIZED WESLSH COAL CHARTERPARTY -- FAILURE TO PROVIDE CARGO -- DEMURRAGE -- LOST PROFITS -- Partial Owner Award Despite Charterer’s ongoing promise to supply cargo, after waiting 95 days, the Owner canceled the contract. Demurrage was awarded up to the time of contract cancellation, however, Owner’s claim for lost profits did not succeed owing to a lack of supporting evidence.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 12/14

NYPE -- TIME CHARTER -- PERFORMANCE WARRANTY -- SPEED AND CONSUMPTION -- GOOD WEATHER CRITERIA -- BREACH OF CHARTER -- CONTRACT LANGUAGE -- Owner Award During a winter voyage the Vessel allegedly underperformed and Charterer subsequently argued that the Owner was in breach of the speed and consumption warranties. Owner countered that the Vessel’s performance warranty was not absolute, but instead, was only applicable during periods of good weather.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Fulton Shipping Inc. of Panama v. Globalia Business Travel SAU (The “New Flamenco”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 21 May 2014

NYPE -- TIME CHARTER -- ANTICIPATORY BREACH – EARLY REDELIVERY – DAMAGES -- PROFIT FROM SALE OF VESSEL -- CAUSATION -- Owner Award Under a time charter contract, Charterer redelivered the Vessel to the Owner two years early. In doing so, Owner considered Charterer in anticipatory repudiatory breach of the contract and filed for damages. Charterer, however, pointed out that the early redelivery allowed Owner to sell the Vessel at a much higher price before the market collapsed. They argued that this windfall should be factored into the Owner’s damages claim.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.