
Case Summaries
Supreme Court NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) NV v Cargill International SA ("Global Santosh") [2016]
“The Supreme Court by a 4:1 majority reversed the Court of Appeal to hold that under the time charter, the vessel was off-hire throughout the period of an arrest caused by a dispute down the charterparty chain involving sub charterers and/or the parties to the commodity contract. Under the Charter, an arrest would not render the vessel off hire if caused by "Charterers or their Agents", but the Court found that those causing the arrest did not qualify as Charterers' agents.”
ST Shipping and Transport PTE LTD v SpaceShipping Ltd [2016]
“Under a Shelltime 4 Charterparty, the Vessel was not off hire when detained by Venezuelan authorities following illegal voyage orders (provided via Charterers' agents); further Charterers were liable pursuant to clause 13 to Owners in respect of the continued detention of the Vessel following redelivery by Charterers on expiry of the Charter term. Permission to appeal was refused.”
Time Bar
“In a recently reported London Arbitration it was held that the six year contractual time bar ran from the moment each instalment of time charter hire fell due from the charterers, and not from the date of redelivery of the vessel. The cause of action for some outlays, including bunkers supplied by the owners, did not however accrue until redelivery.”
Shipowners' Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (Luxembourg) v Containerships Denizcilik Nakliyat ve Ticaret A.S ("Yusuf Cepnioglu") [2016]
“Turkish Charterers unable to rely on Turkish statute allowing direct action against a P&I Club and ordered to arbitrate in London under Club Rules. But the "pay to be paid" rule means they are unlikely to recover.”
SARPD Oil International Ltd. v. Addax Energy SA & Anor [2016]
“In an international purchase contract dispute, a claimant that was not obliged to publish accounts and had not revealed any information about its financial position was required to provide security for costs.”
Vinergy International (PVT) Limited v. Richmond Mercantile Limited FZC [2016]
“An innoncent party may lawfully terminate a contract where at least one of a number of breaches was repudiatory, even though others were not, or were capable of being remedied on notice.”