Shipping & Transport
Main Page - Admiralty - Carriage of Goods - Other Cases - Time C/P Disputes - Voyage C/P Disputes
DMC/SandT/11/24
England
Glory Wealth Shipping Pte Limited v Korea Line Corporation
English High Court: Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): Blair J: [2011] EWHC 1819 (Comm): 22 June 2011:[[1]]
TIME CHARTERPARTY: WRONGFUL TERMINATION BY CHARTERERS: ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES: NO AVAILABLE MARKET FOR BALANCE OF CHARTER PERIOD AT TIME OF TERMINATION: EFFECT OF REVIVAL OF MARKET AT A LATER STAGE
DMC/SandT/11/23
Hong Kong
Birnam Ltd v The Owners of the Ship or Vessel “Hong Ming”, The “Hong Ming”
Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Reyes J: HCAJ No.105 of 2011: 26 August 2011:["Hong_Ming"]
WARRANT OF ARREST: SETTING ASIDE: CLAIM FOR OWNERSHIP OF VESSEL PURSUANT TO A TERMINATED CONTRACT FOR SALE OF VESSEL: MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE: MISUSE OF THE ARREST PROCESS
DMC/SandT/11/22
England
Suek AG v Glencore International AG
Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): Burton J: [2011] EWHC 1361 (Comm): 27 May 2011:[[2]]
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: CIF CONTRACT: CONSTRUCTION: ENTITLEMENT TO GIVE NOTICE OF READINESS: CONCURRENT CAUSES LEADING TO DELAY IN BERTHING: COMMENCEMENT OF LAYTIME
DMC/SandT/11/21
England
Carboex SA v Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA
English High Court: Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court): Field J.: [2011] EWHC 1165 (Comm: 12 May 2011: [[3]]
AMWELSH CHARTERPARTY: DEMURRAGE: EXCEPTION OF STRIKES: WHETHER DELAY IN DISCHARGE ARISING FROM CONGESTION CAUSED BY STRIKES EXCEPTED FROM LAYTIME
DMC/SandT/11/20
England
Great Eastern Shipping Co Ltd v. (1) Far East Chartering Ltd (2) Binani Cement Ltd
English High Court, Queen’s Bench Division: Judge Mackie QC: [2011] EWHC 1372 (Comm): 27 May 2011:[[4]]
WHETHER SHIPOWNER ENTITLED TO ENFORCE LETTER OF INDEMNITY GIVEN BY RECEIVER TO CHARTERER FOR DELIVERY OF CARGO WITHOUT PRESENTATION OF BILLS OF LADING: CONTRACTS (RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTIES) ACT 1999: WHETHER LETTER GIVEN TO CHARTERER: WHETHER CARGO “DELIVERED”: WHETHER LETTER OF INDEMNITY UNENFORCEABLE ON GROUNDS OF PUBLIC POLICY: WHETHER OWNERS ENTITLED TO RECOVER UNDER A UNILATERAL CONTRACT
DMC/SandT/11/19
The Netherlands
Pianura Armatori SpA v Ferrari Shipping Agency G.A. The "Halcyon Star”
Court of Rotterdam (summary proceedings) : Mr A.F.L. Geerdes, LJN:BQ5031, October 7, 2010 (published May 19, 2011): [[5]]
ARREST CONVENTION 1952 ART. 3(4) SECOND PARAGRAPH: ARREST OF VESSEL OWNED BY A VESSEL MANAGER FOR MARITIME CLAIMS AGAINST THE VESSEL MANAGER RELATING TO OTHER VESSELS NOT OWNED BY THE MANAGER
DMC/SandT/11/18
England
The Owner of the Vessel “The Ocean Crown” and others v Five Oceans Salvage Consultants Ltd, “The Ocean Crown”
English High Court: Queen’s Bench Division (Admiralty Court): Gross J: [2009] EWHC 3040 (Admlty), [2010] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 468: 26 November 2009:[[6]]
SALVAGE: ASSESSMENT OF REMUNERATION: WHETHER RISK OF FUTURE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN APPLYING PRINCIPLE OF ENCOURAGEMENT: SCOPE OF THE PRINCIPLE IN THE AMERIQUE
DMC/SandT/11/17
The Netherlands
HDI-Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG et al v APM Terminals Rotterdam B.V. The ‘Pretoria’
Court of Rotterdam: Ms P.A.M van Schouwenburg –Laan, LJN:BO0063, September 29, 2010:[[7]]
STEVEDORE DAMAGE TO VESSEL DURING LOADING: WHETHER STEVEDORES LIABLE FOR THE DAMAGE CAUSED UNDER DUTCH LAW: BURDEN OF PROOF
DMC/SandT/11/16
United Kingdom Supreme Court
Jones v. Kaney
UK Supreme Court; Lords Philips, Hope, Brown, Collins, Kerr, Dyson, Lady Hale; [2011] UKSC 13; 30 March 2011:[[8]]
REMOVAL OF EXPERT WITNESS IMMUNITY IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS
DMC/SandT/11/15
Canada
Société Telus Communications, Hydro-Québec and Bell Canada v Peracomo Inc., Réal Vallée and the fishing vessel Realice
Federal Court of Canada: Harrington J.: 2011 FC 494: 27 April 2011:[[9]]
SHIPPING: SUBMARINE CABLE CUT BY SKIPPER OF FISHING VESSEL: WHETHER DAMAGE CAUSED INTENTIONALLY OR RECKLESSLY AND WITH KNOWLEDGE THAT 'SUCH LOSS' WOULD PROBABLY RESULT: WHETHER DEFENDANTS ENTITLED TO LIMIT LIABILITY UNDER THE 1976 LIMITATION CONVENTION, AS INCORPORATED INTO CANADIAN LAW
DMC/SandT/11/14
The Netherlands
DSV Road B.V. and Amlin Corporate Insurance N.V. v Sneltransport “Heidenend” Tegelen B.V.
Amsterdam Court of Appeal: A.S. Arnold, W.H.F.M. Cortenraad and H.M. ten Haaft, LJN BL9955, April 2, 2010: [[10]]
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: CMR CONVENTION: WHETHER SHIPPER-PACKED TRAILER CAN BE CONSIDERED ‘GOODS’ WITHIN ART.17.2
DMC/SandT/11/13
England
Shell Egypt West Manzala GmbH and another v Dana Gas Egypt Limited Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): Tomlinson J: [2010] EWHC 465 (Comm): 10 March 2010:[[11]]
CONTRACT: JOINT VENTURE FOR GAS EXPLORATION: REPUDIATORY BREACH COMMITTED BY ONE PARTY: INNOCENT PARTY TERMINATED CONTRACT BASED ON WRONG BELIEF THAT CONTRACTUAL TERMINATION CLAUSE WAS TRIGGERED: WHETHER INNOCENT PARTY COULD JUSTIFY TERMINATION OF CONTRACT
DMC/SandT/11/12
England
Choil Trading SA v Sahara Energy Resources Limited (The “Prem Mala”) English Commercial Court: Christopher Clarke J: [2010] EWHC 374 (Comm): 26 February 2010: [[12]]
SALE OF GOODS CARRIED BY SEA: FOB SALE CONTRACT: CIF ON-SALE CONTRACTS: QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGES FOR DELIVERY OF CONTAMINATED GOODS IN BREACH OF FOB CONTRACT: RECOVERABILITY OF HEDGING LOSSES INCURRED IN MITIGATION IN RELATION TO CIF CONTRACTS: WHETHER TRUE CONSTRUCTION OF FOB CONTRACT EXEMPTION CLAUSE EXCLUDED RECOVERY OF HEDGING AND ADDITIONAL EXPENSES/COSTS INCURRED AS A RESULT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT
DMC/SandT/11/11
English High Court
Azimut–Benetti SpA v. Healey
English High Court: Blair J.: [2010] EWHC 2234 (Comm): 3 September 2010: [[13]]
SHIPBUILDING CONTRACT: LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: GUARANTEE: WHETHER LIQUIDATED DAMAGES CONSTITUTE A PENALTY: WHETHER A PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS IN THE CASE OF BREACH: WHETHER A DETERRENT: WHETHER GUARANTEE REMAINS ENFORCEABLE WHERE A PROVISION IN THE UNDERLYING CONTRACT CONSTITUTES A PENALTY: PUBLIC POLICY
DMC/SandT/11/10
United Kingdom
Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd & ORs
United Kingdom Supreme Court: Lord Phillips, Lord Rodger, Lord Walker, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Sir John Dyson): [2010] UKSC 44: 27 October 2010: [[14]]
CONTRACTS: SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT: INTERPRETATION: ‘WITHOUT PREJUDICE’ COMMUNICATIONS: WHETHER FACTS DISCLOSED DURING ‘WITHOUT PREJUDICE’ NEGOTIATIONS ADMISSIBLE AS AN AID TO CONSTRUCTION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
DMC/SandT/11/09
English Court of Appeal
Thomas Crema v. Cenkos Securities PLC
English Court of Appeal (Civil Division); Hughes LJ, Aikens LJ, Chancellor Morritt; [2010] EWCA Civ 1444, 16 December 2010: [[15]]
CONTRACT PARTLY WRITTEN AND PARTLY ORAL: WHETHER TERM SHOULD BE IMPLIED: RELEVANT PRINCIPLES: RELEVANCE OF MARKET PRACTICE: EXPERT EVIDENCE: LIMITATIONS OF EXPERT EVIDENCE
DMC/SandT/11/08
English Court of Appeal
Kookmin Bank v Rainy SA and others
English Court of Appeal: Thorpe and Patten LJJ and Sir Simon Tuckey: [2010] EWCA Civ 582, [2010] 1 CLC 829: 27 May 2010:[[16]]
SHIPBUILDING: LETTER OF GUARANTEE: CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION: EXTREME CONSEQUENCES REQUIRED TO DEPART FROM MEANING OF WORDS AS CONVEYED TO REASONABLE PERSON: NO DEPARTURE SIMPLY BECAUSE COURT WOULD REACH DIFFERENT BALANCE OF PARTIES’ INTERESTS AND OBLIGATIONS UNDER CONTRACT
DMC/SandT/11/07
English Court of Appeal
Brink’s Global Services Inc & Ors v. Igrox Ltd & Anor Court of Appeal: Longmore, Moore-Bick and Wilson LJJ.: [2010] EWCA Civ 1208: 27 October 2010: [[17]]
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: THEFT FROM CONTAINER BY EMPLOYEE OF FUMIGATION COMPANY: WHETHER COMPANY VICARIOUSLY LIABLE: CLOSE CONNECTION BETWEEN THEFT AND PURPOSE OF EMPLOYMENT
DMC/SandT/11/06
English Commercial Court
Dalwood Marine v Nordana Line A/S, The “Elbrus”; Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): Teare J: [2009] EWHC 3394 (Comm), [2010] 2 All ER (Comm) 802: 21 December 2009:[[18]]
TIME CHARTERPARTY: WRONGFUL EARLY TERMINATION BY CHARTERERS: DAMAGES: WHETHER HIRE EARNED BY SHIPOWNERS IN SUBSTITUTE FIXTURE WHICH EXTENDED BEYOND REMAINDER OF ORIGINAL CHARTER RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT
DMC/SandT/2011/05
English Commercial Court
Glencore Energy UK Limited v Transworld Oil Limited (The “Narmada Spirit”): English Commercial Court: Blair J: [2010] EWHC 141 (Comm): 3 February 2010: [[19]]
SALE OF GOODS CARRIED BY SEA: FOB CONTRACT: CORRECT QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGES FOR NON-DELIVERY OF CRUDE OIL CARGO FOR WHICH THERE WAS NO AVAILABLE MARKET: NEED TO ACCOUNT IN DAMAGES FOR REDUCED LOSS SUFFERED FOLLOWING EARLY CLOSING OUT OF HEDGED POSITION OF BUYER FOLLOWING ACCEPTANCE OF SELLER’S REPUDIATION
DMC/SandT/11/04
English Court of Appeal
Röhlig (UK) Ltd v Rock Unique Ltd: Court of Appeal, Sedley, Moore-Bick and Aikens LJJ.: 20 January 2011: [2011] EWCA Civ 18:[[20]]
INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE OF GOODS: BIFA CONDITIONS: WHETHER NO SET-OFF AND TIME BAR PROVISIONS REASONABLE UNDER UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT 1977
DMC/SandT/11/03
English Court of Appeal
KG Bominflot Bunkergesellschaft für Mineraloele mbH & Co v Petroplus Marketing AG (The “Mercini Lady”): English Court of Appeal: Maurice Kay, Rix and Patten LJJ: [2010] EWCA Civ 1145: 19 October 2010: [[21]]
SALE OF GOODS CARRIED BY SEA: FOB ANTWERP SALE OF EU GASOIL WITH FREE DESTINATION: “SPECIAL” COMMON LAW IMPLIED TERM/CONDITION: STATUTORILY IMPLIED CONDITIONS: WHETHER CARGO TO REMAIN ON-SPECIFICATION FOR A REASONABLE TIME FOLLOWING SHIPMENT: EFFECT OF EXCLUSION CLAUSE ON IMPLIED CONDITIONS: SECTION 14(2) OF THE SALE OF GOODS ACT 1979
DMC/SandT/11/02
Singapore
Singapore Court of Appeal
The “Asia Star” [2010] SGCA 12: Judgment delivered by VK Rajah JA, 19 March 2010 [2010] SGCA 12[[22]]
Kelvin Chia Partnership for the Appellant Shipowners
Shook Lin & Bok LLP for the Respondent Charteres
BREACH OF CONTRACT TO CARRY CARGO: WHETHER PLAINTIFF ACTED REASONABLY IN MITIGATION OF LOSS: MEASURE OF DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT TO CARRY CARGO: REQUIREMENT TO NOTIFY THE DEFAULTING PARTY OF INTENDED MEASURES IN MITIGATION
DMC/SandT/11/01
Germany
German Federal Supreme Court – Assessment of Damages under the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (‘CMR’): Date of Judgment: 30 September 2010[[23]]
CMR TRANSPORT: WILFUL MISCONDUCT: ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES
DMC/SandT/10/25
England
Angara Maritime Ltd v Oceanconnect UK Ltd and Oceanconnect.com Inc (The “Fesco Angara”)[[24]]
Queen’s Bench Division, London Mercantile Court: HHJ Mackie QC: [2010] EWHC 619 (QB): 29 March 2010
SALE OF GOODS: BUNKERS/MARINE FUELS: S.25(1) OF THE SALE OF GOODS ACT 1979: SALE OF BUNKERS TO TIME CHARTERERS: BUNKERS DELIVERED TO VESSEL: FAILURE BY TIME CHARTERERS TO PAY SUPPLIERS FOR BUNKERS: RIGHT OF SUPPLIERS TO SUE OWNERS IN CONVERSION AND/OR BAILMENT FOLLOWING PREMATURE REDELIVERY OF VESSEL BY TIME CHARTERERS TO OWNERS
DMC/SandT/10/26
England
Soufflet Negoce SA v Bunge SA
English Court of Appeal: Longmore, Wilson and Toulson LJJ: [2010] EWCA 1102: 13 October 2010[[25]]
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/1102.html
FOB CONTRACT: GAFTA 49 FORM: “IN READINESS TO LOAD”: WHETHER THIS MEANS THAT VESSEL MUST BE “READY” TO LOAD IN A LAYTIME SENSE: RISK OF GOODS DAMAGED BY UNCLEAN HOLDS ON BUYER
DMC/SandT/10/24
England
Zodiac Maritime Agencies Limited v Fortescue Metals Group Limited
Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): David Steel J: [2010] EWHC 903 (Comm): 28 April 2010[[26]]
CONSECUTIVE VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: WRONGFUL EARLY TERMINATION BY CHARTERER: DAMAGES: WHETHER “AVAILABLE MARKET” WHEN CHARTERPARTY TERMINATED: WHETHER SUBSEQUENT EMERGENCE OF MARKET DURING THE BALANCE OF CHARTER PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES
DMC/SandT/10/23
England
ENE 1 Kos Limited v Petroleo Brasileiro SA[[27]]
English Court of Appeal (Civil): Longmore and Smith LJJ and Sir Mark Waller: [2010] EWCA Civ 772: 6 July 2010
TIME CHARTERPARTY: SHIP WITHDRAWN FOR NON-PAYMENT OF HIRE WHILST LOADING CARGO: CARGO DISCHARGED BACK TO SHORE TWO DAYS LATER: WHETHER SHIPOWNER COULD CLAIM REMUNERATION AT MARKET RATE FOR STORING THE CARGO DURING THAT PERIOD: WHETHER REMUNERATION DUE UNDER IMPLIED TERM OR AS QUANTUM MERUIT: WHETHER DUE AS RIGHT CORRELATIVE TO DUTY OF LOOKING AFTER GOODS: WHETHER SHIPOWNER COULD RECOVER COSTS OF PROVIDING BAIL BOND
DMC/SandT/10/22
England
Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA v Sinochem Tianjin Import & Export Corp – the « Aconcagua»[[28]]
English High Court: Christopher Clarke J.: [2009] EWHC 1880 (Comm); 24 July 2009
BILLS OF LADING : SHIPMENT OF CALCIUM HYPOCHLORITE IN CONTAINER: EXPLOSION AND FIRE: DANGEROUS GOODS: WHETHER CARRIER ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY UNDER ART.IV RULE 6 OF HAGUE RULES: STOWAGE OF CONTAINER IN PROXIMITY TO HEATED BUNKER TANK: WHETHER THIS CAUSED THE EXPLOSION: WHETHER THIS RENDERED VESSEL UNSEAWORTHY AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE VOYAGE: WHETHER CARRIER COULD RELY ON DEFENCE OF ERROR IN MANAGEMENT OF THE SHIP
DMC/SandT/10/21
England
Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd v Team-Up Owning Co Ltd – The “Saldanha”[[29]]
English High Court: Gross J.: 11 June 2010 [2010] EWHC 1340 (Comm)
NYPE FORM CHARTERPARTY: PIRACY: WHETHER SHIP OFF-HIRE DURING DETENTION BY PIRATES: AVERAGE ACCIDENTS TO SHIP OR CARGO: DEFAULT OR DEFICIENCY OF MEN: ANY OTHER CAUSE PREVENTING THE FULL WORKING OF THE VESSEL
DMC/SandT/10/20
England
Glory Wealth Shipping Pte Ltd v North China Shipping Limited (M/V “North Prince”)[[30]]
Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): David Steel J: [2010] EWHC 1692 (Comm): 8 July 2010
TIME CHARTERPARTY: WRONGFUL EARLY REDELIVERY OF VESSEL BY SUB-CHARTERER: DAMAGES AS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MARKET RATE OF HIRE AND CONTRACT RATE OF HIRE: DISPONENT SHIPOWNER’S EARLY REDELIVERY OF VESSEL UNDER HEAD CHARTER IRRELEVANT UNLESS CAUSED BY SUB-CHARTERER’S REPUDIATION
DMC/SandT/10/19
English High Court
Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co[[31]]
Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court): Teare J: [2010] EWHC 2026 (Comm): 4 August 2010
TIME CHARTERPARTY: BREACH OF CONTRACT BY CHARTERER: MARKET RATE OF HIRE HIGHER THAN CONTRACT RATE OF HIRE: SHIPOWNER’S CLAIM FOR WASTED EXPENDITURE: RELATION WITH PRINCIPLE IN ROBINSON V HARMAN
DMC/SandT/10/18
Hong Kong
The “Hua Tian Long”[[32]]
Hong Kong SAR Court of First Instance: Stone J in Chambers: HCAJ No. 59/2008: 23 April 2010
http://www.hklii.org/hk/jud/eng/hkcfi/2010/HCAJ000059_2008-70707.html
BREACH OF CONTRACT: DEFENDANT SHIPOWNER’S FAILURE TO PROVIDE VESSEL: CHINESE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT AS SHIPOWNER: CLAIM FOR SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AND CROWN IMMUNITY: WAIVER AND SUBMISSION TO JURISDICTION
DMC/SandT/10/17
South Africa
The MV “Ioannis NK”[[33]]
The owner of the cargo lately laden on board the MV “Ioannis NK” v The Master and Crew & Others (AC 66/2009)
High Court of South Africa (Western Cape High Court, Cape Town) exercising its admiralty jurisdiction: Cleaver J.; 26 August 2009
EXAMINATION OF CREW FOR PURPOSE OF OBTAINING EVIDENCE WHERE DISPUTE SUBJECT TO FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS: EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER THE ADMIRALTY JURISIDICTION REGULATIONS ACT 1983: FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED: RIGHTS OF CREW MEMBERS FOLLOWING A CASUALTY
DMC/SandT/10/16
England and Wales
Kolmar Group AG v Traxpo Enterprises Pvt Limited [[34]]
English High Court: [2010] EWHC 113 (Comm)
INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS: FOB CONTRACT: ECONOMIC DURESS BY DEMANDING PAYMENT FOR LESSER AMOUNT OF GOODS AT HIGHER PRICE THAN AGREED UNDER THE CONTRACT: TORT OF INTIMIDATION: DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT
DMC/SandT/10/15
New Zealand
Tasman Orient Line CV v New Zealand China Clays Limited and others[[35]] Supreme Court of New Zealand (Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and Wilson JJ) [2010] NZSC 37 (16 April 2010)
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: SHIP DAMAGED BY GROUNDING: SEAWATER ENTRY TO FORWARD COMPARTMENTS: DECK CARGO OF CONTAINERS DAMAGED BY INUNDATION: HAGUE-VISBY RULES: ART.IV RULE 2(a): DEFENCE OF ACT, NEGLECT OR DEFAULT OF THE MASTER… IN THE NAVIGATION OR MANAGEMENT OF THE SHIP: FAILURE TO NOTIFY AUTHORITIES OF CASUALTY: FAILURE TO PROVIDE TIMELY AND ACCURATE INFORMATION TO SHIP’S MANAGERS: CAUSE OF CASUALTY INITIALLY FABRICATED: ALL LEADING TO DELAY IN PROVISION OF SALVAGE SERVICES: WHETHER ELEMENT OF GOOD FAITH ESSENTIAL TO CARRIER’S ENTITLEMENT TO RULE 2(a) DEFENCE
DMC/SandT/10/14
English High Court
Sylvia Shipping Co Limited v Progress Bulk Carriers Limited [[36]]
[2010] EWHC 542 (Comm): English High Court of Justice - Commercial Court; Hamblen J.; 18 March 2010
ARBITRATION APPEAL: TIMECHARTERPARTY: MEASURE OF DAMAGES FOR OWNERS’ BREACH: WHETHER OWNERS LIABLE FOR TIMECHARTERERS’ LOSS OF PROFIT ON CANCELLED SUB-CHARTER
DMC/SandT/10/13
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
Maintek Computer (Suzhou) Co Ltd and others v Blue Anchor Line and others[[37]]
Hong Kong SAR Court of First Instance: Reyes J in Chambers: HCAJ No. 106/2008: 25 February 2010 [38]
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: MISDELIVERY BY OCEAN TERMINAL: SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: REAL PROSPECT OF SUCCESS: LIMITATION CLAUSE: MEANING OF ‘DELIVERY’: STAY IN FAVOUR OF ARBITRATION: APPLICABILITY OF TERMINAL CONTRACT
DMC/SandT/10/12
The Netherlands
Maersk B.V., formerly “P&O Nedlloyd” and before that called Nedlloyd Lijnen B.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands v. Irano European Co. Ireco S.A., Luxembourg - The “Dolphin I”[[39]]
Court of Appeal of The Hague (The Netherlands). J.M. van der Klooster, J.E.H.M. Pickaers, J.H.J. Teunissen, 29 September 2009, Case number 105.002.543/01 (unpublished)
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: HAGUE RULES: RECEIVED FOR SHIPMENT BILL OF LADING: CARGO DAMAGE: PERISHABLE GOODS: GROSS NEGLIGENCE: CARRIER’S KNOWLEDGE OF GOODS IN CONTAINERS: ‘BEFORE AND AFTER’ CLAUSE: LIMITATION OF APPLICABILITY OF CONTRACTUAL CLAUSES: REASONABLENESS AND FAIRNESS
DMC/SandT/10/11
High Court of England and Wales
Sotrade Denizcilik Sanayi Ve Ticaret AS v Amadou LO and others (The “Duden”)[[40]]
Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court): Jonathan Hirst, Q.C.: [2008] EWHC 2762 (Comm); [2009] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 145: 19 November 2008
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: CHARTERPARTY: LONDON ARBITRATION CLAUSE INCORPORATED IN BILLS OF LADING: CONSERVATORY ARREST BY CARGO OWNER AND INSURER: JURISDICTION: ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTION: WRONGFUL INDUCEMENT OR PROCUREMENT OF BREACH OF EXPRESS AND IMPLIED TERMS OF BILL OF LADING CONTRACT: REFUSAL TO ACCEPT PROTECTION AND INDEMNITY CLUB UNDERTAKING
DMC/SandT/10/10
Singapore High Court
The “Asia Star” [[41]][2009] SGHC 91
Judgment delivered by Judith Prakash J, 17 April 2009 [2009] SGHC 91
BREACH OF CONTRACT TO CARRY CARGO: WHETHER PLAINTIFF ACTED REASONABLY IN MITIGATION OF LOSS: PLAINTIFF NOT REQUIRED TO INCUR EXTRAORDINARY EXPENSE OR TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF BUSINESS IN ORDER TO MITIGATE LOSS: MEASURE OF DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT TO CARRY CARGO
DMC/SandT/10/09
English High Court ]] Kallang Shipping SA Panama v AXA Assurances Senegal and Comptoir Commercial Mandiaye Ndiaya (The “Kallang”)[[42]]
Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court): Jonathan Hirst, Q.C.: [2008] EWHC 2761 (Comm); [2009] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 124: 19 November 2008
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: CHARTERPARTY: LONDON ARBITRATION CLAUSE INCORPORATED IN BILLS OF LADING: IMPLIED TERMS: ARREST BY CARGO OWNER AND INSURER: SECURITY: JURISDICTION: WRONGFUL INDUCEMENT OR PROCUREMENT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT: PROTECTION AND INDEMNITY CLUB: LETTERS OF UNDERTAKING
DMC/SandT/10/08
Singapore
TAT SENG MACHINE MOVERS PTE LTD V. ORIX LEASING SINGAPORE LTD:[2009] SGCA 42 [[43]]
Singapore Court of Appeal: Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, Chao Hick Tin JA, V K Rajah JA: 11 September 2009
BAILMENT – BAILOR’S RIGHT TO IMMEDIATE RIGHT TO POSSESSION IF BAILEE’S BEHAVIOUR REPUGNANT TO TERMS OF BAILMENT – WHETHER CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS RESTRICTED BAILOR’S RIGHTS UNDER COMMON LAW
TORT – CONVERSION – WHETHER ACT OF REMOVING MACHINE FROM PREMISES AND DELIVERING IT AS INSTRUCTED AMOUNTED TO CONVERSION OF MACHINE – WHETHER ACT OF STORING MACHINE AT WAREHOUSE AMOUNTED TO CONVERSION OF MACHINE – WHETHER ACT OF REDELIVERING MACHINE TO PURPORTED OWNER AMOUNTED TO CONVERSION OF MACHINE
DMC/SandT/10/7
Hong Kong
The “Blue Bridge” (formerly known as The “Great Power”) [[44]]
Hong Kong SAR Court of First Instance: Reyes J in Chambers: HCAJ No. 136/1999: 1 February 2010
http://www.hklii.org/hk/jud/eng/hkcfi/2010/HCAJ000136_1999-69593.html
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT ENTERED INTO AGAINST A SHIPOWNING COMPANY THAT HAD BEEN DISSOLVED: APPLICATION BY RE-INSURER TO INTERVENE: AUTHORITY TO ACT FOR PRINCIPAL IN LITIGATION: DELAY IN APPLICATION TO INTERVENE: REAL PROSPECT OF SUCCESS
DMC/SandT/10/06
Singapore
The “Catur Samudra” [[45]]
Singapore High Court: Judgment delivered by Steven Chong JC, 15 January 2010: [2010] SGHC 18
ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION : WHETHER CLAIM UNDER GUARANTEE IS A CLAIM “ARISING OUT OF AN AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE USE OR HIRE” OF A VESSEL : SECTION 3(1)(H) HIGH COURT (ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION) ACT
DMC/SandT/10/04
Hong Kong
Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, Inc v The Owners and/or Demise Charterers of the Ship or Vessel “Asian Atlas” (The “Asian Atlas”)
Hong Kong SAR Court of Appeal: Ma CJHC, Stone and Reyes JJ: CACV No. 257 of 2007: 23 April 2008 ([2008] 3 HKLRD 604; [46]
ACTION IN REM UNDER HK HIGH COURT ORDINANCE, S.12A(2)(e): WARRANT OF ARREST: FOR “ANY CLAIM FOR DAMAGE DONE BY A SHIP”: SETTING ASIDE: MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE OF FACTS RELATING TO JURISDICTION
DMC/SandT/10/03
Hong Kong
Cheong Yuk Fai and another v China International Freight Forwarders (HK) Ltd
[[47]]
Hong Kong SAR Court of Appeal: Cheung and Yuen JJA and A Chung J: CACV No. 463 of 2002: 26 January 2005: [2005] 4 HKLRD 544 (English translation; judgment handed down in Chinese)
http://www.hklii.org/hk/jud/eng/hkca/2005/CACV000463X_2002-47015.html
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: CLAIM AGAINST CARRIER FOR WRONGFUL DELIVERY OF GOODS: CONVERSION: LIMITATION UNDER HAGUE-VISBY RULES AND BILL OF LADING
DMC/SandT/10/02
German Federal Supreme Court
Date of Judgement: 18 June 2009: Case Reference 1ZR 140/06:[48]
CARRIER’S LIABILITY: BREAKING THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: SUB-CONTRACTING
DMC/SandT/10/01
The Netherlands Supreme Court
Nile Dutch Africa Line B.V, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“NDAL”) v. (1) Delta Lloyd Schadeverzekering N.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“Delta Lloyd”), (2) Premium Tobacco Investments N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands (“Tobacco”), (3) M. Meerapfel Söhne A.G., Basel, Switzerland (“Meerapfel”) and (4) CETAC, Douala, Cameroon (“Cetac”) - The “NDS Provider” [[49]]
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA UNDER BILL OF LADING: HAGUE VISBY RULES: LIABILITY FOR DEFECTIVE CONTAINERS SUPPLIED BY CARRIER: PACKAGING OR PART OF THE VESSEL? INTERPRETATION OF TREATIES UNDER DUTCH LAW
