Jamila has over 15 years of experience practicing shipping law in London and Athens. Her clients include leading ship owners, charterers insurers and oil and gas traders. Jamila’s primary focus is on dry and wet shipping work, advising on all types of disputes arising from ship casualties and commercial transactions and contracts, including ship sale and purchase and newbuilding agreements, charterparties, MOAs and bills of lading. She also acts in international trade disputes arising from contracts for the sale and purchase of commodities and the movement of goods.
Jamila represents clients in LMAA and international arbitrations, and the Commercial and Admiralty Courts in London. She represents clients from Greece, Turkey, Monaco and Italy.
Her substantial experience in the area of admiralty includes representing clients in marine casualties, defending cargo claims and advising and assisting on salvage claims and general average. Jamila also has significant experience in advising on distressed situations arising from the corporate rehabilitation and restructuring of shipping companies, and the associated risks to counterparties.
Jamila’s non-contentious experience includes the negotiation and drafting of commercial agreements, ship sale and purchase and newbuilding agreements, ship management contracts and charterparties. She also regularly advises clients with regard to sanctions issues which may arise prior to entering into new business.
“I AIM TO SUPPORT CLIENTS IN ALL ASPECTS OF THEIR BUSINESS AND FIND PROMPT COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS TO THEIR PROBLEMS”.
Professional Associations & Memberships
- Member of the Piraeus Bar association
What you may not know about Jamila
Jamila is a keen scuba diver and avid traveller
My matter highlights
- Advising shipowners and insurers following the allision of a vessel with a building in the Bosphorus Straits including limitation of liability, GA and issues under the time charterparty.
- Advising shipowners and managers on issues arising out of a major collision and pollution incident off Corsica including pollution claims and limitation of liability.
- Advising shipowners on the impact of the US sanctions with regard to shipments of oil leaving Venezuela.
- Advising shipowners following a main engine failure and salvage under LOF, including negotiation of contracts for transhipment of cargo and advice in respect of GA and salvage indemnity.
- Advising shipowners regarding a serious fire and subsequent total loss of the vessel including issues of GA and transhipment of cargo.
- Advising owners and managers of a tanker after a collision with a passenger vessel in the Dardanelles including recovery of collision damage and defence of cargo claims.
- Advising shipowners regarding orders to issue a shipment of self-heating coal, including advice under the time charterparty and bills of lading and issues of arrest and detention in India.
- Advising shipowners after a main engine failure caused by contaminated bunkers including recovery actions against time charterers.
- Advising shipowners following the insolvency of their charterers of six vessels including advice on liens, security and recovery.
- Advising shipowners, charterers and managers with regard to claims arising out of the collapse of the OW Bunker Group.
My recent publications
News / Court dismisses financing bank’s misdelivery claim for lack of title to sue
04-05-2022 / Maritime
Unicredit Bank AG v. Euronav NV (Sienna)  EWHC 957 (Comm) This was a claim brought by a bank that financed the purchase of a cargo and subsequently sought to recover damages for misdelivery following discharge of the cargo without production of the original bill of lading. The claim failed because, in the circumstances of this case, the bill of lading that had been endorsed to the Bank did not contain or evidence the contract of carriage in respect of the cargo.
Insights / Court corrects obvious accounting mistake in arbitration award
27-04-2022 / Maritime
In a charterparty dispute, the Court has set aside part of an arbitration award on the grounds that the arbitrator reached a conclusion that was contrary to the common position of the parties, and for which neither party contended, without providing an opportunity for the parties to address him on the issue. In the circumstances, this represented a failure to conduct the proceedings fairly. The decision provides useful guidance on how to proceed where a tribunal makes an obvious mistake in its award but declines to remedy it.
News / Ukraine/Russia crisis: potential implications for shipping contracts
02-03-2022 / Maritime
Following recent developments in Ukraine, the international community has acted quickly in introducing sanctions against Russia, targeting a number of Russian entities and Russian individuals, including specified shipping companies and their vessels, as well as financial institutions. Key are the US, EU and UK sanctions against Russia. The scope of these sanctions is continuously evolving in response to the escalating situation and it is important for those who may be impacted to keep a close eye on daily developments.
Insights / Court orders specific performance of obligations under letter of indemnity
24-11-2021 / Maritime
Navig8 Chemical Pools Inc v. Aeturnum Energy International Pte Ltd (Navig8 Ametrine)  EWHC 3132 (Comm)
Insights / English Court upholds LOU jurisdiction provision, notwithstanding Singapore limitation proceedings
21-06-2021 / Maritime
Enemalta Plc v. Standard Club Asia Ltd (MV Di Matteo)  EWHC 1215 (Comm)
Insights / Court declines to imply term on additional security into guarantees
18-03-2021 / Maritime
CVLC Three Carrier Corp and another v. Arab Maritime Petroleum Transport Company  EWHC 551 (Comm)
Insights / Cargo in “apparent good order and condition”: an invitation or representation?
12-02-2021 / Maritime
Noble Chartering Inc v. Priminds Shipping Hong Kong Co Ltd (Tai Prize)  EWCA Civ 87
Insights / Court construes bill of lading and LOU arbitration provisions together
19-01-2021 / Maritime
This was a cargo damage claim which raised the issue of whether the P&I Club’s letter of undertaking amended the arbitration agreement contained in the bills of lading.
Insights / Court confirms its jurisdiction over claims for loss of yacht overboard
06-11-2020 / Maritime
Weco Projects APS v. Loro Piana and others (My Song)  EWHC 2150 (Comm)
Insights / Charterparty hire adjustment terms upheld despite apparent commercial illogicality
27-07-2020 / Maritime
Altera Voyageur Production Limited v. Premier Oil E&P UK Ltd (Voyageur Spirit)  EWHC 1891 (Comm)
Insights / When is a shipper not a shipper?
24-06-2020 / Maritime
A party named as the shipper in a bill of lading has successfully argued that it was not the shipper under the contract of carriage and that its inclusion in the bill of lading was a mistake.
News / Court dismisses defences to non-performance under contract of affreightment
07-05-2020 / Maritime
Classic Maritime Inc v. Limbungan Makmur Sdn Bhd and another company  EWHC 619 (Comm) This was the latest dispute under a Contract of Affreightment (“COA”) between Classic Maritime Inc (“Owners”) and Limbungan Makmur Sdn Bhd (“Charterers”), with the Owners claiming damages for unperformed shipments under the COA. In reaching its decision, the Court relied closely on an earlier Court of Appeal judgment relating to the Owners’ claim for damages involving seven unperformed shipments.
News / No implied indemnity regarding statement of cargo’s apparent condition on loading
12-02-2020 / Maritime
Priminds Shipping (HK) Co Ltd v. Noble Chartering Inc (MV Tai Prize)  EWHC 127 (Comm)
News / Parent company guarantee: trouble on demand?
24-09-2019 / Maritime
Rubicon Vantage International Pte Ltd v. Krisenergy Ltd  EWHC 2012 (Comm) The Commercial Court recently considered the scope of a parent company guarantee given with regard to a bareboat charterparty, which the parties agreed was, at least in part, an on-demand guarantee imposing an autonomous obligation on the guarantor to pay.
News / Court upholds worldwide freezing order in sham charterparty dispute
04-04-2019 / Maritime
Manchester Shipping Ltd v (1) Balfour Worldwide Ltd (2) Mr N V Sochin 2019 EWHC 194 (Comm)
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)  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.
News / Unnecessary strapping of cargo: Charterers pay for Master’s negligence
29-11-2018 / Maritime
Clearlake Shipping Pte Limited v. Privocean Shipping Limited (M/V Privocean)  EWHC 2460 (Comm) In this case, the Master was negligent in insisting that the only safe stowage plan for the ship was one where cargo was part loaded in two holds and strapped, thereby incurring additional time and expense. In fact, the Master had been presented with an alternative stowage plan, which did not require strapping and this would have been perfectly safe, but the Master refused to use it.
News / Cargo claims and title to sue under the bills of lading
12-06-2018 / Maritime
Sevylor v. Altfadul & SIAT (Baltic Strait)  EWHC 629 (Comm) This case considers the extent of the damages that a bill of lading holder, as receiver of damaged goods, can claim from shipowners, in circumstances where the vessel’s charterers have already paid the receivers partial compensation for the cargo damage. The judgment also clarifies the applicability of sections 2(1) and 2(4) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) 1992 in these circumstances.
News / Court of Appeal upholds liability without fault under the Inter-Club Agreement
22-01-2018 / Maritime
Transgrain Shipping (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Yangtze Navigation (Hong Kong) Co Ltd (Yangtze Xing Hua) 2017 EWCA Civ 2107This recent Court of Appeal decision reaffirms the view that the word act in the phrase act or neglect in Clause 8(d) of the Inter-Club Agreement (the ICA) does not stretch to culpable act The Court of Appeal, upholding the first instance decision, held firm to the reasoning that the intention behind Clause 8 was to provide a mechanical apportionment of liability based on causation without comprising a fault-based analysis
News / When an owner can sell its charterers’ cargo: an application to the English Court
07-09-2017 / Maritime
Dainford Navigation Inc. v. PDVSA Petroleo S.A. (Moscow Stars)  EWHC 2150 (Comm) In this case, the Owners had exercised a contractual lien over their Charterers’ cargo on board the vessel due to failure to pay hire. The hire dispute was being resolved in arbitration proceedings but, during this time, the Owners’ vessel was effectively being used as a floating warehouse as the cargo could not be discharged into storage. The decision provides an illustration of when an owner can obtain an order for sale of cargo on board before the conclusion of arbitration proceedings, thereby releasing the vessel for other employment.
News / Construction of charterparty terms: choose your words carefully!
11-07-2017 / Maritime
Gard Shipping AS v. Clearlake Shipping Pte Ltd (MV Zaliv Baikal)  EWHC 1091 (Comm)
Insights / Compensation for financial losses under shipbuilding contract warranty
14-03-2017 / Maritime
Star Polaris LLC v HHIC-PHIL INC (Star Polaris) 2016 EWHC 2941nbspThe Commercial Court has recently considered the meaning of consequential or special losses, damages or expenses in a shipbuilding contract warranty Did the phrase have the traditional English law meaning or a particular meaning of its ownnbsp
News / Claims under the NYPE Inter-Club Agreement
26-01-2017 / Maritime
London Arbitration 3016nbspThis decision illustrates how disputes often arise under the NYPE Inter-Club Agreement (the ICA) even though it purports to be a simple, mechanical, knock-for-knock agreement nbspnbsp
News / Liability for underperformance caused by fouling due to Charterers’ orders
18-10-2016 / Maritime
Imperator I Maritime Company v. Bunge SA (Coral Seas)  EWHC 1506 (Comm) The Court has recently held that, in considering whether owners are in breach of a continuing performance warranty, it is no defence for the owners to show that the underperformance has been caused by underwater fouling following the charterers’ employment orders.
News / Does your notice to appoint an arbitrator interrupt the running of time for a counterclaim?
28-04-2016 / Maritime
Glencore International AG v. (1) PT Tera Logistic Indonesia and (2) PT Arpeni Pratama Ocean Line TBK  EWHC 82 (Comm) The Commercial Court has recently considered whether notices of arbitration referring to “claims” and “all disputes” were effective to interrupt the running of time for a counterclaim. The Court held that, where both claims and counterclaims arose from a single set of facts and gave rise to a balance of accounts, then notices of arbitration referring to “claims” and “all disputes” are effective notices for the purposes of interrupting the running of time for a counterclaim.
News / NYPE 2015 - Setting the new standard?
16-02-2016 / Maritime
In October 2015, the 1946 and 1993 versions of the New York Produce Exchange (NYPE) form, which is the norm for time chartering dry bulk vessels, were substantially revised. The new version comprises 57 clauses and a detailed vessel description, to bring the form in line with current industry practices and recent legal changes. The key revisions are addressed below.
News / Speed and consumption claims revisited
16-02-2016 / Maritime
Polaris Shipping Co. Ltd v. Sinoriches Enterprises Co. Ltd (Ocean Virgo)  EWHC 3405 (Comm) The English High Court has issued useful guidance for underperformance disputes, which are commonplace these days under time charters for dry bulk carrier vessels.
News / Deal or no deal?
02-11-2015 / Maritime
Hellenic Petroleum Cyprus Limited v. Premier Maritime Limited (Navigas 1)  EWHC 1894 (Comm) Parties should be very careful when negotiating an agreement to ensure that there are no misunderstandings as to whether a contract has been concluded or not. In this case, it was not clear whether the parties had concluded a long-term charter and therefore, it was not clear whether there was a valid arbitration agreement. That confusion meant that time and costs were wasted seeking an arbitration award only to have it set aside by the English Court.
News / Conditions and complexities in a tripartite agreement be specific
25-06-2015 / Maritime
Seaglance Maritime v. Casillo Commodities Italia SpA (M/V Proikonissos)  EWHC 1369 (Comm) A tripartite agreement reached between the Owners, the Shippers and the Receivers provided that demurrage be paid to the Owners in the event that the Owners were found not liable for cargo contamination by an arbitration tribunal. The tripartite agreement was not specific as to which arbitration involving which parties would trigger the obligation for demurrage to be paid. The Court held that a party’s obligations under the tripartite agreement could not be triggered by an arbitration when that party was not part of the arbitration reference. The circumstances and the judgment highlight the importance of specificity when drafting settlement agreements. This is especially the case where there are contingencies for future events and where more than two parties are involved.
News / What as is where is really means in yacht sale contracts
22-04-2015 / Maritime
Speed read The commercial understanding of the phrases “as is” or “as is where is” has always been that a buyer must take a yacht in the condition in which she is found at the time defined in the contract, all faults included, without any warranties by the seller as to quality or condition. This understanding has previously been questioned but has now been endorsed again in the English 2014 case of Michael Hirtenstein & Others v. Hill Dickinson LLP.
News / The Yacht Brief April 2015
22-04-2015 / Maritime
Welcome to the first edition of the Ince & Co online Yachting Newsletter, which we shall be sending out on a regular basis to our valued yachting clients and contacts. In each Newsletter, we shall be reviewing relevant cases and regulatory developments that will be of interest to you and may impact on your business. Our focus will be on international legal and regulatory developments relating to yachtbuilding, sale and purchase, insurance and operational matters. We hope you enjoy the newsletter! Please let us know if you have any questions or comments about the articles, if you are interested in a particular topic or if you have any feedback or suggestions on the newsletter itself.
News / Beware the pitfalls of inconsistent dispute resolution clauses
29-01-2015 / Maritime
Transgrain Shipping BV v. Deiulemar Shipping SpA & Another (Eleni P)  EWHC 4202 (Comm) Parties should be very careful to ensure that no competing dispute resolution clauses are contained in the same contract. In this case, two competing arbitration clauses meant that it was unclear whether a time bar provision applied to a claim under the charterparty. The parties had to go to court to establish which arbitration clause applied.
News / Consecutive time charters - check your contract terms
28-01-2015 / Maritime
London Arbitration 18/14 – LMLN, 16 October 2014 If the vessel’s hull is fouled during a charter and there is no opportunity to clean it before delivery under the follow-on charter to the same charterer, is the owner liable for the underperformance during the second charter? According to the Tribunal in London Arbitration 18/14, on the facts of that case, the Owners were indeed liable.
News / Does a LOU arbitration agreement for the underlying cargo claim completely replace the bill of lading arbitration clause?
20-10-2014 / Maritime
Viscous Global Investments Ltd. v. Palladium Navigation Corporation (Quest)  EWHC 2654 In the context of cargo claims brought under four bills of lading, the Commercial Court has recently considered whether an arbitration provision in a Club Letter of Undertaking (LOU) had entirely replaced the arbitration agreement in the bills of lading. If it had not, the Cargo Interests may have been faced with a time bar argument in respect of some of their claims. Luckily for them, the Court found in their favour.
News / Commercial Court confirms traditional understanding of “as is where is” in ship sale and purchase contract
20-10-2014 / Maritime
Michael Hirtenstein & Others v. Hill Dickinson LLP  EWHC 2711 (Comm) It will be recalled that in the case of Dalmare SPA v. Union Maritime Ltd (Union Power)  EWHC 3537 (Comm), the Commercial Court, albeit in obiter comments, expressed the surprising and contentious view that the words “as is where is” were likely not sufficient to exclude from a sale contract the implied terms of satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose under s.14 Sale of Goods Act 1979 (“SGA”).
News / The correct test for anticipatory breach by renunciation
22-07-2014 / Maritime
Geden Operations Ltd v. Drybulk Handy Holdings Inc (Bulk Uruguay)  EWHC 855 (Comm) The Commercial Court recently considered the principles applicable to anticipatory breach of contract in a charterparty dispute that came before the Court on appeal from a London arbitration award.
News / Court upholds LMAA tribunal’s jurisdiction to rule on costs
22-07-2014 / Maritime
Sun United Maritime Ltd v. Kasteli Marine Inc (IMME)  EWHC 1476 (Comm) In this recent case, the Commercial Court has affirmed the jurisdiction of the appointed arbitrators to rule on whether the parties reached a binding agreement regarding the recoverable costs of the arbitration.
News / Underperformance disputes under time charterparties
24-06-2014 / Maritime
London Arbitration 12/14, LMLN, 29 May 2014 This award is the latest of a number of court decisions and LMAA arbitration awards dealing with issues that frequently arise in time charterparty underperformance disputes.
News / Destruction by fire not a mechanical breakdown under a laytime exclusion clause: Court of Appeal confirms Commercial Court decision
20-01-2014 / Maritime
E.D.& F.Man Sugar Ltd. v. Unicargo Transportgesellschaft GmbH (Ladytramp)  EWCA Civ 1449 This was a dispute as to whether destruction by fire was a “mechanical breakdown” under Clause 28 (laytime exclusion clause) of the charter. The Tribunal and the Commercial Court applied a narrow construction of the laytime exclusion clause and concluded that fire was not “mechanical breakdown”. The Court of Appeal upheld both the Tribunal's award and the Commercial Court's decision and, once again, ruled in favour of the Owners and found that they were entitled to demurrage.