Menu
Shipping E-Brief January 2019

News / / Beijing, Dubai, Hamburg, Hong Kong, Shipping E-Brief January 2019, Piraeus, Shanghai, Singapore

The Shipping E-Brief is a regular publication providing you with key information on legal decisions and developments in shipping and related business areas. 

Our January 2019 edition of the Shipping E-Brief is full of articles dealing with topical shipping issues. 

Missed a previous edition? Read them here:

Shipping E-Brief November 2018

Shipping E-Brief October 2018

Shipping E-Brief June 2018

Related sectors:

Featured news & insights

News / Supreme Court considers burden of proof in cargo damage claims under Hague Rules

17-12-2018 / Maritime

Volcafe v. CSAV [2018] UKSC 61 This recent Supreme Court judgment deals with the issue of whether the carrier or cargo interests bear the burden of proof under the Hague Rules in relation to claims for cargo loss and damage. In particular, it considers the interplay between a carrier’s obligations under Article III.2 of the Hague Rules to properly and carefully load, carry and care for the cargo and the inherent vice defence provided under Article IV.2.(m).

Supreme Court considers burden of proof in cargo damage claims under Hague Rules

News / Court of Appeal confirms ship arrestor does not have to provide cross-undertaking in damages

24-01-2019 / Maritime

Stallion Eight Shipping Co SA v. NatWest Markets PLC (MV Alkyon) [2018] EWCA 2760 The Court of Appeal has upheld the Admiralty Court’s decision not to order an arresting party to provide a cross-undertaking in damages. In doing so, both the first instance and appellate court have confirmed the traditional position under English law, which is that there is no right to damages in circumstances in which an arresting party acts in good faith and without gross negligence, but is later unsuccessful in pursuing the claim.

Court of Appeal confirms ship arrestor does not have to provide cross-undertaking in damages

News / Court construes termination clause in standard crew management agreement

24-01-2019 / Maritime

Uniteam Marine Shipping GMBH v. MS “United Tenorio” Schifffahrtsgesellschaft mbH (United Tenorio) [2018] EWHC 1593 (Comm) The Court has recently overturned an arbitration award that dealt with the construction of a termination clause in a crew management agreement. The Court found that the objective meaning of the clause based on the language used was sufficiently clear and the wider commercial considerations did not require a different result.

Court construes termination clause in standard crew management agreement

News / BIMCO 2020 Sulphur Clauses: “A fair allocation of responsibilities and liabilities”?

12-12-2018 / Maritime

The implementation date for the MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 14 sulphur cap is fast approaching. There are two key dates to keep firmly in mind.

BIMCO 2020 Sulphur Clauses: “A fair allocation of responsibilities and liabilities”?

News / Whether ships within a fleet count as separate 'establishments' in collective redundancy consultation

24-01-2019 / Maritime

Seahorse Maritime Ltd v. Nautilus International [2018] EWCA Civ 2789 The Court of Appeal has recently held that individual ships chartered to clients all over the world, rather than the fleet of ships itself, were separate “establishments” for the purposes of collective consultation obligations. This decision has significant consequences in terms of the number of employees that could be made redundant on any one ship.

Whether ships within a fleet count as separate 'establishments' in collective redundancy consultation

News / Dubai Cassation Court upholds insurers’ coverage defence to marine claim

08-01-2019 / Insurance, Maritime

In a recent judgment, the Dubai Court of Cassation upheld multiple defences raised by insurers against coverage of a cargo claim following partial loss to a cargo of direct reduced iron.

Dubai Cassation Court upholds insurers’ coverage defence to marine claim

Quick links

The Legal 500 2021

“Very available and responsive to company developments in real time. Frank, clear advice – not just the ‘easy’ answer.”

The Legal 500 2022

“The solicitors who have handled our employment related issues are of the highest quality in terms of their specialist area of expertise, their professionalism and their approach to us as clients and as people. Special mention has to be made of Laura Livingstone. Laura became a key member of our team and felt more like a colleague than an external adviser – a colleague you could rely upon. Laura’s attention to detail, professionalism and responsiveness was second to none. Laura has come to know and understand us as individuals and this has enabled her to personalise her advice and even sometimes to preempt our future requirements. We have a very special and extremely valuable relationship with her and the firm.”

- The Legal 500

The Legal 500 2022

“Ince are an excellent “fit” with our specific needs. The firm has consistently provided a broad range of personnel-related advice and in our experience that advice has been consistently of the very highest professional standard: it has been timely, comprehensive, accurate and at a cost which is commensurate with the budget of an organisation of our size.”

- The Legal 500

The Legal 500 2022

“The firm has an unusually high degree of insight into the practices and policies required by the Gambling Commission as regards compliance with its own requirements and conditions – particularly Andrew Tait, derived from his previous in-house experience.”

- The Legal 500