Shipping & Transport
Main Page - Admiralty - Carriage of Goods - Other Cases - Time C/P Disputes - Voyage C/P Disputes DMC/SandT/10/13
English High Court
Sylvia Shipping Co Limited v Progress Bulk Carriers Limited [[1]]
[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[[2]]
Hong Kong SAR Court of First Instance: Reyes J in Chambers: HCAJ No. 106/2008: 25 February 2010 [3]
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”[[4]]
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 J.M. van der Klooster, J.E.H.M. Pickaers, J.H.J. Teunissen, 29 September 2009, Case number 105.002.543/01 (unpublished)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”)[[5]]
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” [[6]][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”)[[7]]
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 [[8]]
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”) [[9]]
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” [[10]]
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; [11]
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
[[12]]
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:[13]
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” [[14]]
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
