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

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.

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.

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.

Time Charterers relied on a WRC Report to justify deductions from hire for underperformance and overconsumption based on (i) extrapolated ‘good weather’ underperformance; alternatively (ii) a fouled hull on delivery. The Tribunal dismissed the former as it failed to recognise the C/P ‘adverse current’ parameter and the latter as Charterers’ survey was inconclusive. Charterers’ contention that  it was underperformance which caused Owners to incur regulatory costs under incorporated BIMCO emissions clauses (thus relieving Charterers from any reimbursement obligation) failed for the same reason.

Read the full judgment here.

Charterers claimed off-hire and a deduction from hire under a time charter trip, alleging that hull fouling on delivery reduced the vessel’s speed and performance and citing The Divinegate. Owners resisted the claim, arguing that the performance warranty was not engaged because there was insufficient “good weather” data within the meaning of the charterparty, and that The Divinegate was irrelevant. The Tribunal held that underwater fouling constituted a defect in the hull capable of engaging the off-hire clause and that Charterers were entitled to a deduction from hire, notwithstanding the lack of qualifying good-weather period under the performance clause. The performance-evidence regime did not prevent recovery where loss of speed was otherwise established.

Read the full judgment here.