The High Court has handed down Judgment in Vitol SA v Beta Renowable SA [2017] EWHC 1734 (Comm) highlighting the importance of ensuring that communication and conduct for the purpose of accepting repudiatory breach is clear and unambiguous. This concerned a contractual dispute between Vitol, a major oil trader, and Beta Renowable Group, a manufacturer … Continue Reading
In March this year the Admiralty Court in London handed down its judgment in respect of a collision between “Alexandra 1” (“A1”) and “Ever Smart” (“ES”) (see: Nautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd [2017] EWHC 453 (Admlty)). This blog takes a look at the judgment, which serves to clarify the positon on the … Continue Reading
The Supreme Court has today handed down Judgment allowing Owners’ appeal in the “New Flamenco” (see our previous blog of 2 March 2016 and our Client Alerts of 25 February 2016 and 8 November 2016). For those of you who are not familiar with the case, Charterers were in repudiatory breach of the Charterparty, which … Continue Reading
NAVALMAR UK LTD V KALE MADEN HAMMADDELER SANAYI VE TICART AS [2017] EWHC 116 (COMM) – The MV “ARUNDEL CASTLE” In this case the Commercial Court considered the meaning of “within port limits” in the context of a charterparty on an amended Gencon 94 form which provided that: “[Notice of readiness] to be tendered at … Continue Reading
In a recent decision, the Paris Court of Appeal refused to enforce an LMAA arbitral award on the basis that the underlying contract was affected by illegality on account of corruption. Introduction Pursuant to article V of the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, a national authority may … Continue Reading
TRANSGRAIN SHIPPING (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD v YANGTZE NAVIGATION (HONG KONG) CO LTD [2016] EWHC 3132 This was an appeal from an LMAA arbitration award, considering the true construction of clause 8(d) of the Inter-Club Agreement 1996 (“ICA”); specifically, whether the meaning of the term “act” in the phrase “act or neglect” should be restricted to … Continue Reading
REGULUS SHIP SERVICES PTE LTD v (1) LUNDIN SERVICES BV (2) IKDAM PRODUCTION SA [2016] EWHC 2674 (Comm) In this case, the meaning of the term “in light ballast condition” came up for consideration by the Court for a second time. The irony being that the earlier precedent derived from another dispute that the same … Continue Reading
In a watershed decision concerning the scope of maritime liens under the U.S. Commercial Instruments and Maritime Lien Act (“CIMLA”), the District Court for the Southern District of New York recently held that OW Bunker entities did not have valid maritime liens for the supply of bunkers to vessels. In the first decision by a … Continue Reading
A recent decision provides authority for the broadly accepted understanding that a “unit”, for the purposes of limitation under Article IV Rule 5 of the Hague Rules, cannot apply to a bulk cargo – it can only mean a physical unit for shipment and not a unit of measurement or a customary freight unit (the … Continue Reading
The Privy Council has confirmed that it is possible to contract out the right to limit liability, and so operators must be vigilant in ensuring this does not inadvertently happen, write Mark O’Neil and Anushka Karunaratne in Tradewinds. The full article can be read here.… Continue Reading
The Supreme Court rules that a collateral lie embellishing a valid claim does not amount to a fraudulent claim. Versloot Dredging BV and another (Appellants) v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG and others [2016] UKSC 45 Facts The vessel DC Merwestone was incapacitated by an ingress of water which flooded the engine room. A claim … Continue Reading
Sino Channel Asia Ltd v. Dana Shipping and Trading Pte Singapore and Another [2016] EWHC 1118 (Comm) A recent English High Court decision serves as a reminder of the importance of taking great care in relation to service of notice to commence arbitration. The case concerned whether the notice was sent to the correct party. … Continue Reading
In the recent case of MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. v. Cottonex Anstalt [2016] EWCA Civ 789 the Court of Appeal ruled that the commercial purpose of the contract had been frustrated and that demurrage on detained containers which could not be redelivered to the carrier did not accrue indefinitely.… Continue Reading
The recently decided case of SBT STAR BULK & TANKERS (GERMANY) GMBH & CO KG V COSMOTRADE SA (THE “WEHR TRAVE”) [2016] EWHC 583 (Comm) in the Queen’s Bench Division of the Commercial Court and before The Hon Sir Bernard Eder will, perhaps, come as a surprise. This was an appeal pursuant to section 69 … Continue Reading
Sang Stone Hamoon Jonoub Co Ltd v Baoyue Shipping Co Ltd (“The Bao Yue”) [2015] EWHC 2288 (Comm) The dispute related to a cargo of iron ore carried from Iran to China by the Defendant Shipper. The bill of lading had been issued “to order”, with no consignee named. The Shipper was requested to discharge … Continue Reading
The decision of Mr. Justice Flaux in (1) Societe de Distribution de Toutes Merchandises en Cote D’Ivoire trading as “SDTM-CI” (2) Kouma Assitan (3) Amlin Corporate Insurance N.V. (4) Axa Corporate Solutions Assurance and (1) Continental Lines N.V. (2) Genshipping Corporation [2015] EWHC 1747, considers the effect of clause 5 of the Synacomex 90 form, … Continue Reading
Re Pan Ocean Co Ltd [2015] EWHC 1500 (Ch) The Applicants had entered into a pool agreement and time charter with Pan Ocean, both of which were governed by English law and provided for London arbitration. The agreements were terminated, and the Applicants sought damages. Pan Ocean went into rehabilitation in Korean, and the Applicants … Continue Reading
ST Shipping & Transport Inc v Kriti Filoxenia Shipping Co SA [2015] EWHC 997 (Comm) Charter terms The charter, on BPVOY3 form, provided that subject to the provisions of clause 24, the vessel would proceed to “1/2 safe port(s) Black Sea excl Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey”. Clause 17 provided for a laycan period of 1 to … Continue Reading
The Claimant Buyers brought proceedings against the Defendant Bank under refund guarantees issued by the Bank in support of two shipbuilding contracts between the Buyers and Sellers. Pursuant to the contracts, the Claimant had paid instalments on terms that they would be refunded if the contracts were cancelled. When the ships were not delivered on … Continue Reading
Hin-Pro International Logistics Ltd v Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA [2015] EWCA Civ 401 The Appellant Freight Forwarder commenced actions in China under 70 bills of lading, which incorporated the Respondent’s standard clauses. Clause 23 provided in material part: “This Bill of Lading and any claim or dispute arising hereunder shall be subject to … Continue Reading
Further to the previous post commenting briefly on Spar Shipping AS v Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co., Ltd, for further details and commentary please see the recent Reed Smith Client Alert by Andrew Taylor and Alexandra Allan.… Continue Reading
In Kuwait Rocks Co v AMB Bulkcarriers Inc (The Astra) (as reported in a previous post), the court determined that the obligation to make punctual payment of hire under the amended NYPE time charter in that case was a condition of the contract, so that failure to pay a single hire payment entitled the vessel … Continue Reading
Swissmarine Services SA v Gupta Coal India Private Limited [2015] EWHC 265 (Comm) The Claimant and Defendant entered into a COA which contained an English law and jurisdiction clause. When the Defendant failed to comply with the terms due to difficulties in despatching and shipping the cargo, the Claimant brought a claim for breach of … Continue Reading
Trafigura Beheer BV v Navigazione Montanari SpA [2015] EWCA Civ 91 The subject vessel was chartered to carry a cargo of oil from Abidjan, Ivory Coast to Lagos, Nigeria. Clause 46 of the charter (on an amended BPVOY3 form) incorporated the Hague-Visby Rules, which contain exemptions in respect of loss or damage arising or resulting … Continue Reading
