Tiger Ship No. 8 Limited v. Vinmar International Limited (The “Tiger Integrity”) – SMA No. 4499 – 24 March 2025

Tiger Ship No. 8 Limited (“Owners”) brought a claim against Vinmar International Limited (“Charterers”) under a voyage charterparty dated October 19, 2022, for the chemical tanker Tiger Integrity. The charter involved shipment of chemical cargoes loaded at three Chinese ports (Jiangyin, Jingjiang, and Mailiao) and discharged at three Indian ports (JNPT, Hazira, and Kandla). The Owners claimed $127,451.24 in demurrage following delays at the load and discharge ports.

The arbitration was initiated on June 24, 2024, after Charterers failed to pay the demurrage despite multiple invoices and a demand letter.  Charterers did not participate in the arbitration.

The Owners submitted comprehensive voyage and laytime data. NORs were validly tendered per ASBATANKVOY Clause 6. Demurrage calculations were based on the vessel’s operations at the six ports involved, with total laytime used exceeding allowed time by approximately 4.79 days. At the agreed rate of $28,000/day, Owners’ final invoice after standard deductions totaled $127,451.24.

Despite negotiating and reducing their claim during 2023, Owners received no payment. Charterers later attempted to dispute the laytime calculations—citing tank cleaning delays—but presented no supporting evidence in arbitration. The Owners maintained that even if cleaning occurred, NORs had been validly tendered, and Charterers failed to support their rebuttal.

The Panel held that the NORs were properly issued under ASBATANKVOY, laytime began and ended per contractual terms, and demurrage was validly incurred.  Further, Charterers’ failure to pay constituted a breach, and their non-participation in the proceedings did not excuse their obligations.  Owners were thus entitled to pre-award interest at the U.S. Prime Rate, totaling $11,219.21, as well as full reimbursement of legal fees ($12,185.00) and arbitration fees ($7,900.00) for a total of $158,755.

It should be noted that Charterers’ failure to respond or engage with the arbitration proceedings led the tribunal to award full recovery to Owners.