Changes

The UK Supreme Court, in upholding the decisions of the High Court [[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Herculito_Maritime_Ltd_v_Gunvor_International_BV]] and the Court of Appeal[[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Herculito_Maritime_v_Gunvor_International_-_The_Polar]], dismissed bill of lading holders’ appeal against their liability to contribute in general average to the ransom payment made to pirates, who had seized the vessel whilst she was in transit in the Gulf of Aden, for the release of the vessel and her cargo. Although the Gulf of Aden and War Risk clauses in the voyage charterparty were incorporated into the bills of lading, they did not – as a matter of interpretation – exclude the bill of lading holders from such a liability. This conclusion was based on the grounds that there was no insurance “code” or “fund” arrangement under the voyage charterparty as between the shipowners and the charterers, whereby the charterers, by reimbursing the owners for the war risk premia, became joint insureds under the war risk policies, with the result that the owners could not recover from them losses insured under those policies. Even if there such a code or fund, there was no necessity to manipulate/change the language of those clauses to substitute references to the bill of lading holders in place of the references to the charterers therein.