You, Christian Dwyer
& Ince, in any case

17-10-2022 / Maritime

Argentum Exploration Ltd v. The Silver and all persons claiming to be interested in, and/or have rights in respect of, the silver (SS Tilawa) [2022] EWCA Civ 1318 The Court of Appeal, by a majority, has upheld the Admiralty Court decision that the Republic of South Africa (RSA) was not entitled to assert a claim of state immunity in respect of in rem proceedings brought by salvors concerning a cargo of silver bars recovered from the seabed 75 years after the sinking of the carrying vessel.

03-12-2021 / Maritime

Herculito Maritime Ltd & others v. Gunvor International BV & others (Polar) [2021] EWCA Civ 1828

19-10-2021 / Maritime

On 31 December 2020, the Brexit transition period ended. As a result, the UK’s regime for recognising and enforcing judgments within Europe ceased to be governed by the Brussels regime, primarily the recast Brussels Regulation (EU member states), and the Lugano Convention 2007 (EU member states, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland).

07-10-2021 / Maritime

Following much discussion, the witness evidence reforms have now made their way to the Admiralty Court. The provisions now apply to trial witness statements signed on or after 1 October 2021 in Admiralty Court proceedings and constitute a further reminder that a witness statement must be exactly that – a statement in the words of the witness.

02-07-2021 / Maritime

Eastern Pacific Chartering Inc v. Pola Maritime Ltd (Divinegate) [2021] EWHC 1707 (Comm)

19-02-2021 / Maritime

Evergreen Marine (UK) Limited v. Nautical Challenge Ltd (Ever Smart c/w Alexandra I) [2021] UKSC 6

15-02-2021 / Maritime

Significant changes to the rules governing the preparation of witness statements will come into force on 6 April 2021. They will apply, with a few exceptions, to all trial witness statements signed on or after that date in Business and Property Court proceedings, although they will not apply to Admiralty Court proceedings until at the earliest 1 October 2020.

23-12-2020 / Maritime

Argentum Exploration Limited v. The silver and all persons claiming to be interested in and/or to have rights in respect of the silver [2020] EWHC 3434 (Admty)

08-12-2020 / Maritime

Herculito Maritime Ltd and others v. Gunvor International BV and others (mv Polar) [2020] EWHC 3318 (Comm)

01-07-2020 / Maritime

Webinar series, 'Collisions: why are they still happening?', hosted by the Ince Admiralty team. The series of four webinars explore the COLREGS and why collisions are still happening, and considers calls for changes to the COLREGS to accommodate autonomous ships. These webinars use a combination of case studies, Q&A and technical insight.

10-06-2020 / Maritime

Trafigura v. Clearlake and Clearlake v. Petrobras (Miracle Hope) [2020] EWHC 995 (Comm)

27-05-2020 / Maritime

27 May 2020, London: Ince, the international legal and professional services firm, has partnered with global maritime welfare charity Sailors’ Society, one of the largest seafarers’ support charities in the world, to raise awareness for the plight of seafarers. Dubbed the “key workers of the sea”, seafarers are particularly exposed to the effects of the Coronavirus outbreak.

03-04-2020 / Maritime

Aspen Underwriting Ltd and others (Appellants) v. Credit Europe Bank NV (Atlantik Confidence) [2020] UKSC 11 In a decision that will be significant for marine and other insurers, the Supreme Court has found that the English courts did not have jurisdiction over claims brought by the hull underwriters of the vessel, Atlantik Confidence, as against the Dutch bank that was the mortgagee of the vessel and also the assignee of the insurance policy and the loss payee. The Supreme Court held that the bank was not bound by the exclusive English jurisdiction clauses in the policy or the settlement agreement with the vessel owners and managers. Nor could the underwriters rely on the special insurance provisions in the recast Brussels Regulation to establish English Court jurisdiction over their claims. The underwriters are now faced with the prospect of pursuing their claims against the bank in the Netherlands.

05-03-2020 / Maritime

Alize 1954 and CMA CGM SA v. Allianz Elementar Versicherungs AG & Others (CMA CGM Libra) [2020] EWCA Civ 293 In a unanimous judgment, a Court of Appeal panel of experienced shipping Lords Justice has upheld the decision of the Admiralty Judge, Teare J, in the CMA CGM Libra that a defective passage plan rendered the vessel unseaworthy and that the Owners’ claim for contribution in general average failed.

12-11-2019 / Maritime

Navalmar UK Limited v. (1) Ergo Versicherung AG & (2) Chubb European SE (BSLE Sunrise) [2019] EWHC 2860 (Comm) The Court has rejected shipowners’ arguments that the wording of a standard form General Average (GA) guarantee, customarily issued by cargo insurers to secure the release of cargo in a GA situation, precluded the cargo insurers from pleading actionable fault as a defence to a GA contribution claim.

04-04-2019 / Maritime

Alize 1954 and CMA CGM SA v Allianz Elementar Versicherungs AG and others (CMA CGM Libra) 2019 EWHC 481 (Admlty)

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.

29-11-2018 / Maritime

Close Brothers Limited v. (1) AIS (Marine) 2 Limited (in liquidation) and (2) Mr Paul Simon Chandler [2018] EWHC B14 (Admlty) The Commercial Court has recently, in the context of the sale of a vessel, given helpful guidance on the extent of the duties owed by the mortgagee to the mortgagor when selling re-possessed property.

14-02-2018 / Maritime

Rosgosstrakh Limited v. (1) Yapi Kredi Finansal Kiralama AO and (2) Mehtap Denizcilik (MV Medy) [2017] EWHC 3377 (Comm) What happens if a party is wrongly named in a claim form in English court proceedings? Can the correct party be substituted, even if the limitation period has subsequently expired? In a recent case arising out of an incident that resulted in the sinking of a vessel, the Commercial Court has allowed the substitution.

26-01-2017 / Maritime

Regulus Ship Services v (1) Lundin Services and (2) IKDAM Production SA 2016 EWHC 2674 (Comm)

19-10-2016 / Maritime

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

18-10-2016 / Maritime

Bahamas Oil Refining Company International v. Owners of Cape Bari Tankschiffahrts GmbH & Co KG (Cape Bari) [2016] UKPC 20 The Privy Council has recently confirmed that it is possible for a shipowner to contract out of his right to limit liability under the 1976 Limitation Convention. This is a decision of significance for the shipping industry as, should an owner inadvertently lose the protection of limitation, owners (and potentially charterers, should owners seek to be indemnified) risk facing large and unanticipated liabilities. 

08-07-2016 / Maritime

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

07-07-2016 / Maritime

On 6 May 2016, the Comité Maritime International (“CMI”) approved a revised version of the York-Antwerp Rules (YAR). This is the first such revision in 12 years and may prove to be a significant evolution of the rules used by general average adjusters. Although many aspects of the 1994 YAR remain, there are significant amendments (for example, to interest rates, adjustment procedure and the time limit for claims) that should be welcomed by supporters of the 2004 YAR.

17-02-2016 / Maritime

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

16-02-2016 / Maritime

The former Owners of the motor vessel “Melissa K” now named “Jasmine I” v. The former Owners of the motor tanker “Tomsk” subsequently named “Pure Energy” and now named “Thayer” [2015] EWHC 3445 (Admlty)