Tagged: Vol. 3 No. 3

ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- DETENTION -- CHARTER PARTY -- TIME CHARTERER -- VOYAGE -- LACHES -- TIME-BAR -- Partial Owner Award The Owners began arbitration to recover detention damages from four separate charter parties that the Time Charterers had contracted. The Vessel was idle for extended periods between these voyages instead of being utilized. On the other hand, the Charterers rejected the claims basis laches and time-bar breaches.

ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- DEMURRAGE -- LAYTIME -- BERTH -- CHARTER PARTY -- VOYAGE -- Buyer Award This arbitration centered upon two separate claims for demurrage. In the first case, the Buyer and Seller agreed that laytime would begin upon berthing if the Vessel was late. But because the Vessel did not arrive on time, it was given an unfavorable berth rotation with no Buyer repercussion, which the Sellers now claim as demurrage. The second dispute was over whether a legal charter party existed for the voyage.

ASBATANKVOY -- BERTH -- TERMINAL -- LINE HANDLER -- STRIKE -- DEMURRAGE -- LAYTIME -- Owner Award The Vessel was unable to berth at the Charterers’ terminal because of a line handler strike. The Owners argued that delays should be held as demurrage because the Charterers did not supply a berth "reachable upon arrival." The Charterers challenged this claim by classifying the strike as a delay “…over which the Charterer has no control, such delay shall not count as used laytime.”