Shipping & Transport: Difference between revisions

From DMC
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 10: Line 10:


'''CMR TRANSPORT: APPLICATION OF ART. 29 CMR: BURDEN OF PROOF: REDUCTION OF UNLIMITED LIABILITY DUE TO CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE SENDER IF THE CARRIER IS NOT NOTIFIED OF AN UNEXPECTEDLY HIGH VALUE OF THE TRANSPORT GOODS'''
'''CMR TRANSPORT: APPLICATION OF ART. 29 CMR: BURDEN OF PROOF: REDUCTION OF UNLIMITED LIABILITY DUE TO CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE SENDER IF THE CARRIER IS NOT NOTIFIED OF AN UNEXPECTEDLY HIGH VALUE OF THE TRANSPORT GOODS'''


DMC/SandT/13/03
DMC/SandT/13/03

Revision as of 15:00, 18 May 2013

Main Page - Admiralty - Carriage of Goods - Other Cases - Time C/P Disputes - Voyage C/P Disputes

Previous years: 2011 - 2010

DMC/SandT/13/04

Germany

German Federal Supreme Court: Date of Judgement: 13 June 2012: [[1]]

CMR TRANSPORT: APPLICATION OF ART. 29 CMR: BURDEN OF PROOF: REDUCTION OF UNLIMITED LIABILITY DUE TO CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE SENDER IF THE CARRIER IS NOT NOTIFIED OF AN UNEXPECTEDLY HIGH VALUE OF THE TRANSPORT GOODS


DMC/SandT/13/03

England

Dry Bulk Handy Holding Inc and Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA v Fayette International Holdings Ltd and Metinvest International SA (The “Bulk Chile”): English Commercial Court: Andrew Smith J: [2012] EWHC 2107 (Comm): 24 July 2012:[[2]]

CHAIN OF CHARTERPARTIES: HEAD TIME CHARTER, SUB-TIME CHARTER, TIME TRIP CHARTER AND VOYAGE CHARTER: OWNERS’ BILLS OF LADING: RIGHT TO INTERVENE IN COLLECTION OF FREIGHT: RIGHT TO LIEN SUB-FREIGHT AND SUB-HIRE: RIGHT TO HIRE OR REASONABLE REMUNERATION FOR COMPLETION OF VOYAGE FOLLOWING TERMINATION OF TIME CHARTER


DMC/SandT/13/02

England

Wuhan Ocean Economic & Technical Cooperation Co Ltd v Schiffahrts-Gesellschaft “Hansa Murcia” MBH & Co KG

English Queen’s Bench (Commercial Court): Cooke J: [2012] EWHC 3104 (Comm): 6 November 2012:[[3]]

CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF VESSEL: ADDENDUM FOR SELLERS TO OBTAIN EXTENSION OF REFUND GUARANTEE: IMPLIED TERM TO OBTAIN EXTENSION WITHIN REASONABLE TIME BEFORE EXPIRY OF ORIGINAL GUARANTEE: INNOMINATE TERM: BUT BREACH OF IMPLIED TERM NOT A REPUDIATORY BREACH AS, UNDER THE TERMS OF THE GUARANTEE, BUYERS COULD MAINTAIN THE SECURITY BY COMMENCING ARBITRATION


DMC/SandT/13/01

Germany

German Federal Supreme Court

"Und Adryatik"; Date of Judgement: 15 December 2011: [[4]]

CMR TRANSPORT: APPLICATION OF ART. 2 CMR: FIRE ON RO-RO-CARRIER: HAGUE RULES AS ‘CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED BY LAW’: FIRE AS AN EVENT WHICH COULD ONLY HAVE OCCURRED BY REASON OF CARRIAGE BY SEA


DMC/SandT/12/25

England

E.D. & F. Man Sugar Ltd v Unicargo Transportgesellschaft mBh

English High Court (Commercial Court): Eder J: [2012] EWHC 2879 (Comm): 23 October 2012:[[5]]

CHARTERPARTY: LAYTIME AND DEMURRAGE: DESTRUCTION OF CONVEYOR-BELT SYSTEM AT LOADING PORT BEFORE FIXTURE: DELAY IN BERTHING: NO OBLIGATION ON CHARTERERS TO NOMINATE A SECOND BERTH: DESTRUCTION DID NOT CONSTITUTE MECHANICAL BREAKDOWN: ACT OF STATE-SPONSORED PORT AUTHORITY IN ORDINARY COURSE OF CARRYING OUT PORT OR ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS DID NOT FALL WITHIN EXCEPTION OF GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE


DMC/SandT/12/24

England

Carboex SA v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA

English Court of Appeal: Lord Neuberger MR, Moore-Bick and Toulson LJJ: [2012] EWCA Civ 838: 19 June 2011:[[6]]

DEMURRAGE: CALCULATION OF LAYTIME: STRIKE EXCEPTION: STRIKE CAUSING CONGESTION AT PORT AND CHARTERED VESSELS DELAYED FROM BERTHING AS A RESULT: PERIOD OF DELAY TO BE DISCOUNTED FROM CALCULATION OF LAYTIME SO LONG AS STRIKE WAS THE EFFECTIVE CAUSE OF DELAY


DMC/SandT/12/23

Singapore

Singapore Court of Appeal

The “Bunga Melati 5” [2012] SGCA 46: Judgment delivered by VK Rajah JA, 21st August 2012: [[7]]

ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION: WHETHER A GOOD ARGUABLE CASE ON THE MERITS REQUIRED: THE VASILIY GOLOVNIN EXPLAINED


DMC/SandT/12/22

Australia

1. Jebsens International (Australia) Pty Ltd and Anor v Interfert Australia Pty Ltd and Ors (2011) 112 SASR 297, 25 August 2011 (Anderson J)

2. Dampskibsselskabet Norden A/S v Beach Building & Civil Group Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 696, 29 June 2012 (Foster J):[[8]]

WHETHER VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY A "SEA CARRIAGE DOCUMENT" FOR PURPOSES OF S.11 AUSTRALIAN CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1991


DMC/SandT/12/21

England

TAOKAS NAVIGATION SA v. KOMROWSKI BULK SHIPPING KG (GMBH & CO); KENT LINE INTERNATIONAL LTD. v. SOLYM CARRIERS LTD THE MV “PAIWAN WISDOM”

English High Court; Teare J; [2012] EWHC 1888 (Comm); 11 July 2012: [[9]]

CONWARTIME 2004: OWNERS’ LIBERTY TO REJECT VOYAGE ORDERS: MATERIAL INCREASE IN RISK BETWEEN CHARTERPARTY DATE AND DATE OF ORDER NOT REQUIRED: CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION


DMC/SandT/12/20

England

Petroleo Brasileiro SA v ENE Kos 1 Ltd

United Kingdom Supreme Court: Lords Phillips, Walker, Mance, Clarke and Sumption: [2012] UKSC 17, [2012] 2 WLR 976: 2 May 2012:[[10]]

TIME CHARTERPARTY: SHELLTIME 3 FORM: VESSEL WITHDRAWN FOR NON-PAYMENT OF HIRE WHILST LOADING: LOSS OF USE OF VESSEL: EXPENSES INCURRED IN DISCHARGING CARGO BACK TO SHORE: WHETHER LOSS AND EXPENSE RECOVERABLE UNDER INDEMNITY CLAUSE: WHETHER RECOVERABLE AS RIGHT CORRELATIVE TO DUTY AS BAILEE TO LOOK AFTER GOODS: WHETHER CHARTERERS’ ORDER TO LOAD AN EFFECTIVE CAUSE...


DMC/SandT/12/19

Hong Kong

The “Decurion”

Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Reyes J: HCAJ No.141 of 2010: 4 May 2012: [[11]]

ADMIRALTY: IN REM JURISDICTION: CLAIM AGAINST VESSEL OWNED BY DEFENDANT: PAYMENT OUTSTANDING FOR BUNKERS SUPPLIED TO DEFENDANT FOR VESSELS CHARTERED BY RELATED COMPANY: STRIKING OUT: WHETHER DEFENDANT “IN POSSESSION OR IN CONTROL” OF CHARTERED VESSELS WITHIN SECTION 12B(4) OF HIGH COURT ORDINANCE


DMC/SandT/12/18

England

EITZEN BULK A/S v. TTMI SARL - THE “BONNIE SMITHWICK”

English High Court; Eder J; [2012] EWHC 202 (Comm); 14 February 2012:[[12]]

SHELLTIME 4: CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION: “BUNKERS ON DELIVERY/REDELIVERY” CLAUSE: MEANING OF ‘PRICE ACTUALLY PAID’


DMC/SandT/12/17

Hong Kong

The “Marcatania”

Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Reyes J: HCAJ No.138 of 2008: 2 December 2011:[[13]]

CONTRACT: AGREEMENT TO EXCHANGE SLOTS FOR USE: SLOTS ON VESSEL CHARTERED BY THIRD PARTY: FAILURE TO PAY HIRE: VESSEL WITHDRAWN BY SHIPOWNER: WHETHER SHIPOWNER OBLIGED TO ON-CARRY CARGO UNDER BAILMENT: WHETHER LIABLE IN CONVERSION FOR DELAY IN RELEASING CARGO


DMC/SandT/12/16

England

M.H. Progress Lines SA v Orient Shipping Rotterdam BV and other, The “Genius Star 1”

English Queen’s Court (Commercial Court): Teare J: [2011] EWHC 3083 (Comm), [2012] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 222: 28 November 2011:[[14]]

TIME CHARTERPARTY: SUB-CHARTER: CARGO CLAIM AGAINST SUB-CHARTERER: APPORTIONMENT OF CLAIMS AGAINST CHARTERER AND SHIPOWNER UNDER INTER-CLUB AGREEMENT 1996: DIFFERENT TIME BARS PROVIDED IN HEAD CHARTER AND INTER-CLUB AGREEMENT: APPLICABLE TIME BAR


DMC/SandT/12/15

England

Sideridraulic Systems SpA v BBC Chartering & Logistics GmbH & Co KG

English Queen’s Bench (Commercial Court): Andrew Smith J: [2011] EWHC 3106 (Comm): 30 November 2011: [[15]

CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: INTERPRETATION OF MASTER’S REMARK IN BILL OF LADING: WHETHER CARGO WAS DECK CARGO UNDER HAGUE-VISBY RULES: IF DECK CARGO, WHETHER PARTIES AGREED THAT HAGUE-VISBY RULES NEVERTHELESS APPLIED: WHETHER US COURTS EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION CLAUSE APPLIED


DMC/SandT/12/14

England

Isabella Shipowner SA v Shagang Shipping Co Ltd (The “Aquafaith”)

English Commercial Court: Cooke J: [2012] EWHC 1077 (Comm): 26 April 2012:[[16]]

TIME CHARTERPARTY: ARBITRATION ACT 1996 SECTION 69 APPEAL: AMENDED NYPE FORM: RULE IN WHITE AND CARTER V MCGREGOR: WHETHER OWNERS OBLIGED TO ACCEPT PREMATURE RE-DELIVERY OF VESSEL BY CHARTERERS


DMC/SandT/12/13

Hong Kong

A O Smith Electrical Products (Changzhou) Co Ltd v Blue Anchor Line & Ors

Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Reyes J: [2012] 1 HKLRD 301: 18 November 2011:[[17]]

CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: WAYBILL: LETTER OF UNDERTAKING: INTERPRETATION: GOVERNING LAW OF CARRIAGE: APPLICABLE LIMIT OF LIABILITY


DMC/SandT/12/12

Malaysia

Sarawak Shell Berhad v South Sumatra Richfield Marine Pte Ltd (The “Red Gold”)

Malaysian Court of Appeal: Sulaiman Bin Daud JCA, Syed Ahmad Helmy Bin Syed Ahmad JCA and Anantham Kasinather JCA: 19 March 2012: [[18]]

ADMIRALTY: COLLISION BETWEEN OFFSHORE SUPPLY VESSEL AND FIXED OFFSHORE OIL PLATFORM: RIGHT OF VESSEL OWNERS TO LIMIT LIABILITY: WHETHER COLLISION CAUSED BY NEGLIGENCE OF OWNERS IN THE NAVIGATION OR MANAGEMENT OF VESSEL: WHETHER VESSEL OWNERS ENTITLED TO LIMIT LIABILITY DUE TO ABSENCE OF ACTUAL FAULT OR PRIVITY: MERCHANT SHIPPING ORDINANCE 1952 SECTION 360 VIZ. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CONVENTION 1957


DMC/SandT/12/11

England

Osmium Shipping Corporation v Cargill International SA (The “Captain Stefanos”)

English Commercial Court: Cooke J: [2012] EWHC 571 (Comm): 13 March 2012: [[19]]

TIME CHARTERPARTY: ARBITRATION ACT 1996 SECTION 69 APPEAL: AMENDED NYPE (1946) FORM INCORPORATING CONWARTIME 2004: WHETHER VESSEL WAS OFF-HIRE DURING PERIOD OF HIJACKING BY SOMALI PIRATES: WHETHER RIDER CLAUSE PROVIDING FOR OFF-HIRE DURING “CAPTURE/SEIZURE” WAS QUALIFIED BY THE PHRASE “BY ANY AUTHORITY”: WHETHER CONWARTIME 2004 CLAUSE QUALIFIED OFF-HIRE RIDER CLAUSE


DMC/SandT/12/10

England

Progress Bulk Carriers Limited v Tube City IMS LLC (The “Cenk Kaptanoglu”)

English Commercial Court: Cooke J: [2012] EWHC 273 (Comm): 17 February 2012:[[20]]

VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: ARBITRATION ACT 1996 SECTION 69 APPEAL: WHETHER SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT VOIDABLE FOR DURESS: WHETHER OWNERS’ CONDUCT, ALTHOUGH NOT ILLEGAL, AMOUNTED TO “ILLEGITIMATE PRESSURE”


DMC/SandT/12/09

England

Acergy Shipping Ltd v. Société Bretonne De Réparation Navale SAS

Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): David Steel J: [2011] EWHC 2490 (Comm): 5 October 2011: [[21]]

CONTRACT FOR PROVISION OF REPAIR SERVICES TO VESSEL: FIRE CAUSING DAMAGE BEYOND REPAIR WORK UNDERTAKEN: INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACT: SCOPE OF INDEMNITY CONTAINED THEREIN


DMC/SandT/12/08

England

Geofizika DD v. MMB International Limited and Greenshields Cowie & Co Ltd: “The Green Island”

English Court of Appeal; Lord Neuberger, Thomas LJ, and Sir Nicholas Wall; [2010] EWCA Civ 459, [2010] 2 Lloyds Rep 1; 28 April 2010: [[22]]

INCOTERMS 2000 CIP: CARRIAGE ON DECK: OBLIGATIONS OF FREIGHT FORWARDER: CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION: CAUSATION


DMC/SandT/12/07

England

Hyundai Merchant Marine Company Limited v Trafigura Beheer BV (The “Gaz Energy”)

English Commercial Court: Flaux J: [2011] EWHC 3108 (Comm): 29 November 2011:[[23]]

TIME CHARTER: SPEED AND PERFORMANCE WARRANTY: PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF CHARTER: WHETHER SPEED AND PERFORMANCE AN “ALL WEATHERS” WARRANTY OR LIMITED TO “MAXIMUM WIND FORCE 4 ON BEAUFORT SCALE”


DMC/SandT/12/06

The “Oriental Baltic”

Singapore High Court: Tan Lee Meng J : [2011] 3 SGHC 75: [[24]]

OWNERS OF VESSEL UNDER VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION: IN REM PROCEEDINGS AGAINST VESSEL COMMENCED AFTER LIQUIDATION: PLAINTIFF FILED CAVEAT AGAINST RELEASE AGAINST VESSEL PRIOR TO LIQUIDATION: ACTION AGAINST COMPANY UNDER LIQUIDATION ORDINARILY STAYED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT: WHETHER LEAVE SHOULD BE GRANTED TO PLAINTIFF TO CONTINUE WITH ITS ACTION


DMC/SandT/12/05

England

Thai Maparn Trading Co Ltd v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Asia Pte Ltd (The “Med Salvador” and “Goa”)

English Commercial Court: Beatson J: [2011] EWHC 2494 (Comm): 4 October 2011:[[25]]

INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS: FOB CONTRACT: WHETHER BUYERS IN BREACH OF CONDITION PRECEDENT IN CONTRACT BY FAILING TO ISSUE 7 DAY ETA OF VESSEL: WHETHER SELLERS IN REPUDIATORY/RENUNCIATORY BREACH BY REJECTING BUYERS’ NOTICE AND STATING THAT CARGO WOULD NOT BE READY IN TIME


DMC/SandT/12/04

England

Pacific Basin IHX Limited v Bulkhandling Handymax AS (The “Triton Lark”): English Commercial Court: Teare J: [2011] EWHC 2868 (Comm): 8 November 2011:[[26]]

TIME CHARTER: PIRACY RISKS IN GULF OF ADEN IN 2008: CONWARTIME 1993/2004 CLAUSE: ARBITRATION APPEAL: SECTION 69 OF ARBITRATION ACT 1996: CORRECT TEST FOR ASSESSING RISK OF PIRACY INCIDENT OCCURING FOR PURPOSE OF 1993/2004 CLAUSE: WHETHER OWNERS DEVIATED BY REROUTING VESSEL VIA CAPE OF GOOD HOPE INSTEAD OF GULF OF ADEN


DMC/SandT/12/03

England

Emeraldian Limited Partnership v Wellmix Shipping Limited and Guangzhou Iron & Steel Corporation Limited (The “Vine”)

English Commercial Court: Teare J: [2010] EWHC 1411 (Comm): 17 June 2010:[[27]]

VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: WHETHER VESSEL’S OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN CLEARANCE BY PORT AUTHORITIES BEFORE GIVING NOTICE OF READINESS WAIVED FOR PURPOSE OF COMMENCEMENT OF LAYTIME: WHETHER CHARTERERS COULD RELY ON EXCEPTIONS TO RUNNING OF LAYTIME: WHETHER CHARTERERS IN BREACH OF SAFE PORT WARRANTY: WHETHER DEMURRAGE RECOVERABLE FOR DETENTION OF VESSEL


DMC/12/02

England

ASTRAZENECA UK LIMITED v. ALBEMARLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION and ALBEMARLE CORPORATION

English High Court; Flaux J; [2011] EWHC 1574 (Comm); 21 June 2011:[[28]]

CONTRACT: CLAUSES GRANTING THE RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL: EXCLUSION CLAUSES AND DELIBERATE BREACH


DMC/SandT/12/01

The Netherlands

Furtrans Denzilick Ticaret Ve Sanayi AS (“Furtrans”) v Augusta Due Srl (“Augusta”): The "Constanza M”

Supreme Court of the Netherlands (“SCN”) (summary proceedings): Vice-President J.B. Fleers as Chairman and the judges A.M.J. van Buchem-Spapens, F.B. Bakels, C.E. Drion and G. Snijders LJN:BT2708, December 9, 2011:[[29]]

CONSTRUCTION OF ART. 3(4) SECOND PARAGRAPH, INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION RELATING TO THE ARREST OF SEA-GOING SHIPS 1952