2,051
edits
Changes
From DMC
no edit summary
'''Background'''
The appeal arose out of the constructive total loss of “Ocean Victory” when, in attempting to leave Kashima port in Japan during a severe storm in October 2006, she contacted the northern end of the south breakwater, wen¬t went aground and thereafter broke in two, necessitating her removal.
Owners of “Ocean Victory” had demise chartered her to a related company, on the Barecon 89 form. That company in turn period time chartered her to Sinochart, which in turn trip time chartered her to Daiichi (with all charterparties containing a materially identical safe port undertaking) for a voyage which encompassed the call at Kashima port.
Footnote 3: CMA CGM S.A. v Classica Shipping Co Ltd [2004] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 460, [2004] EWCA Civ 114
Footnote 4: The “CMA Djakarta” (fn2fn3), per Longmore LJ, at [10]
Footnote 5: Articles 1 and 2 of the 1976 Convention provide:
