Changes

'''ED&F Man Sugar Ltd v Unicargo Transportgesellschaft GmbH (Polska Zegluga Morska PP, interested party), The “Ladytramp”'''

'''Court of Appeal; Pattern, Tomlinson, Christopher Clarke LJJ; [2013] EWCA Civ 1449, 19 November 2013'''

'''Summary'''

The Vessel’s charter contained an exception to laytime for “mechanical breakdowns…”, which Charterers relied on when delay was caused by a fire that destroyed a conveyor-belt system at the load port. Charterers did not prove that “mechanical breakdown” was the cause of the destruction of the conveyor-belt system, and they were accordingly unable to deduct the delay from laytime and demurrage.

'''Background'''

Unicargo chartered the “Ladytramp” (“Vessel”) to E D & F Man on the Sugar Charterparty 1999 form to load a cargo of sugar from “1-2 safe berths, 1 safe port” within a specified geographical range. Clause 28 listed exceptions to laytime, including “mechanical breakdowns at mechanical loading plants”.

'''Judgment'''

Charterers relied on The Afrapearl, [2004] EWCA Civ 864, and argued that “mechanical breakdown” had occurred simply because the machinery no longer functioned as a conveyor-belt system. However (and unlike Clause 28 here), the clause in The Afrapearl was not restricted by the cause of the “breakdown”, the word “mechanical” not appearing there.

'''Comment'''

The Ladytramp highlights the need for parties relying on contractual exceptions to ensure that each and every contractual pre-requisite for doing so is met, and that evidence is adduced for each. Here, however, the cost of detailed investigations in Paranagua may well have been disproportionate to the claim faced (about US$400,000), at least until equivalent claims from other Owners subsequently emerged.