Case Summaries
London Arbitration 14/26
Under a T/C trip, Charterers, having stemmed bunkers, failed to pay the supplier, who then arrested the Vessel at the discharge port; Owners’ P&I first secured and then paid the supplier’s claim, plus costs. Charterers contested any C/P liability to reimburse Owners but the Tribunal disagreed, finding that a ‘non lien’ clause in the pro forma C/P had been incorporated into the present C/P and rendered Charterers liable. The Tribunal also dismissed Charterers’ underperformance claim as the 4 days complained of was the period of the supplier’s arrest.
London Arbitration 15/26
Charterers relied on their WRC report (based on broad satellite data) to support their speed and consumption claim based on 24 hours ‘good weather’ as required and defined in the C/P. Owners contested this on the basis of a screenshot from the Vessel’s ECDIS (recording actual route conditions). The Tribunal disregarded the latter, as it covered insufficient time, but nonetheless dismissed Charterers’ claim as their sole evidence, the WRC report, itself showed adverse currents, albeit for sub-periods of the 24 hours.
Read the full judgement here
London Arbitration 13/26
The charterers were held liable for hull damage caused by the stevedores’ barge, in circumstances where Clause 8 of the NYPE 1993 charterparty placed responsibility for cargo operations upon the charterers, and clause 35 provided that charterers should pay for stevedore damage. However, the owners’ damages were reduced substantially because they failed to prove post-redelivery loss of use.
Read the full judgement here
London Arbitration (2026) 1217 LMLN 2
Owners of a Vessel chartered on the Vegilvoy form to carry a cargo to a North African port, obtained an urgent Arbitration Award after waiting off such a port, as instructed, cargo sale arrangements having foundered. On the basis of Vessel operational issues (sludge tanks full, Class certificates imminent expiry, shortages of fresh water and provisions, and loss of forward fixtures) the Tribunal ruled (based on the Vegilvoy “Liberty Clause”) that Owners could instead discharge at such safe port (including in another country) as they chose, with cargo remaining in their possession pending delivery to persons entitled, Charterers being liable for all loss, damage and expense caused to Owners by reason of their failure to take delivery.
London Arbitration 9/26 (2026) LMLN
A Gencon 94 C/P for the carriage of bauxite provided that demurrage and balance of freight were payable within 20 banking days of completion of discharge. Before arrival at discharge, Owners demanded load port demurrage, and threated to lien the cargo. The Tribunal set aside the ensuing agreement to Owners’ figures on the grounds that it was obtained by economic duress. Nevertheless, on the merits, Owners’ calculations had been correct and the economic duress had little impact on the end result.
Read the full judgement here.
London Arbitration 8/26 (2026) LMLN
In January 2023, having loaded ammonium nitrate at a Sea of Azov port for the Black Sea, under an amended Gencon 94, the Vessel was halted at the Kerch Strait by the Russian Authorities, due to the nature of the cargo. Prolonged delay ensued, followed by eventual landing of the cargo at the load port. The Tribunal held that the interference was unforeseeable, thus not a breach of the safe port warranty. Nevertheless damages for detention were payable under the incorporated Voywar 93 clause, Charterers having failed to act decisively (in particular by nominating an alternative discharge port).
Read the full judgement here.