London Arbitration 11/25 (2025) 1195 LMLN 2

Under an amended NYPE T/C for a China-Canada trip, the Vessel failed to follow the route recommended by Charterers’ weather routing company, choosing instead one which in the event was 320 miles longer, on the (later-advanced) grounds that it better avoided a forecast typhoon. The LMAA SCP Arbitrator found that the Master’s contemporaneous justification made no reference to navigational safety (and indeed took the Vessel nearer the typhoon) and the longer route taken was solely to facilitate a crew change. Owners were responsible for the additional time and consumption. The Tribunal however dismissed Charterers’ claim that despite there being no “good weather” days as defined in the c/p, the Vessel nevertheless underperformed if weather and current factors were applied to average speed attained.

 

Read the full judgment here.

Previous
Previous

Process & Industrial Developments Ltd v The Federal Republic of Nigeria [2025] UKSC 36

Next
Next

Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2025] EWCA Civ 1227