Voyage C/P Disputes
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):[[1]]
WHETHER VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY A "SEA CARRIAGE DOCUMENT" FOR PURPOSES OF S.11 AUSTRALIAN CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1991
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:[[2]]
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/12/03
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:[[3]]
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/SandT/11/26
England
National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia v BP Oil Supply Company
English Court of Appeal: Ward and Tomlinson LJJ and Sir Mark Potter: 12 October 2011: [2011] EWCA Civ 1127:[[4]]
VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: BPVOY4: DEMURRAGE CLAIMS TO BE PRESENTED WITH FULL DOCUMENTATION WITHIN 90 DAYS OF COMPLETION OF DISCHARGE: FINAL SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM: WHETHER MIS-DESCRIBED FURTHER DEMURRAGE CLAIM TIME-BARRED: COST OF BUNKERS CONSUMED FOR RE-BERTHING
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: [[5]]
AMWELSH CHARTERPARTY: DEMURRAGE: EXCEPTION OF STRIKES: WHETHER DELAY IN DISCHARGE ARISING FROM CONGESTION CAUSED BY STRIKES EXCEPTED FROM LAYTIME
DMC/SandT/10/10
Singapore High Court
The “Asia Star”[2009] SGHC 91 [[6]]
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
