2,051
edits
Changes
From DMC
no edit summary
The present judgment achieves the result that some argue against. Notably, the judge considered that a decision in favour of owners in this instance would have been uncommercial, given the greater potential for complex and low value speed and performance disputes to arise.
The present judgment does not stand alone. A London arbitration reported in LMLN (fn.2)achieved the same result. The circumstances of that arbitration resulted from a failure of the description of permissible weather conditions to be tied into the period during which performance was to be assessed.
Given that speed and performance provisions are not normally consolidated in one clause or contractual document, and are often subject to negotiation leading up to a clean fixture, the potential for disputes of this nature arising is ever present.
Footnote:
1. [2004] 1 AC 715, [2003] UKHL 12, per Lord Hoffmann at [112].
2. (2006) 682 LMLN 3
