2,051
edits
Changes
From DMC
no edit summary
The judge at first instance had held that there had been a breach of the safe port undertaking and awarded Gard substantial damages for loss of vessel (USD88.5m), liability for SCOPIC (Special Compensation P & I Clause) expenses (USD12m), liability for wreck removal expenses (USD34.5m), and loss of hire (USD2.7m).
The Court of Appeal set aside the judgment holding that (a) the conditions which affected Kashima port were an abnormal occurrence; in consequence there was no breach of the safe port undertaking, and (b) the insurance provisions in the demise charterparty meant Gard, as assignees of owners, were not entitled to claim against demise charterers in respect of losses covered by the hull insurance.[[http://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Gard_Marine_%26_Energy_v_China_National_Chartering_-_The_Ocean_Victory_-_Court_of_Appeal]]
The issues for decision on appeal to the United Kingdom Supreme Court were:
