Paul specialises in advising clients on the resolution of shipping disputes, both in court and arbitration. He has particular expertise in ship sale and purchase, newbuilding and charterparty disputes. His clients include the world’s leading shipowners, charterers, P&I Clubs, commodity trading companies, chartering and sale & purchase brokers, ship managers and shipping agents.
Paul has forty years’ experience of shipping matters, with a particular emphasis on charterparty disputes, carriage of goods by sea, sale & purchase (both contentious and non-contentious) and newbuilding contracts. He also acts frequently in errors and omissions claims for chartering and sale & purchase brokers, ship managers and shipping agents.
Paul is regularly involved in the drafting of newbuilding and sale and purchase contracts and the resolution of related disputes.
He is widely regarded as one of the world’s leading shipping lawyers.
Paul’s expertise extends to acting for commodity trading companies on all aspects of the sale and transportation of soft commodities, crude oil, refined products and gas. He has dealt with trade disputes including contamination, shortage and late delivery claims.
In addition, he has drafted different types of sale, off-take, storage and joint venture agreements and has advised trader clients on their corporate structures.
“My aim is to provide commercial legal advice; advice that provides solutions.”
Professional associations & memberships
- Supporting member of LMAA
- Baltic Exchange member
What you may not know about Paul
Paul is a keen but ultimately flawed golfer.
My matter highlights
- Advising shipowner on major misdelivery claim.
- Advising shipowner and insurers on major collision in Suez Canal.
- Advising shipowner and insurers on major pollution incident.
- Advising shipowners and insurers on offtake of crude oil cargo and terms of transhipment agreement.
- Advising shipowner and insurer on large cargo claim in Jordan.
- Advising ship operator on sale of six tankers.
- Drafting joint venture agreement between shipowner and major grain house.
- Drafting shipbuilding contract for major shipowner with Korean shipyard.
My testimonials and accolades
“Paul Herring is one of the best shipping layers in the market. He is hugely knowledgeable and very user-friendly.”
“The "immensely experienced" Paul Herring leads the shipping group and is regarded as one of the UK's leading lawyers on dry shipping matters.”
“Sources consider global shipping head Paul Herring to be "one of the absolute best in the business."... "He has been involved with shipping so much he knows how the industry works - You can talk to him on a commercial basis and he understands the business."”
“Knows what to fight, and what not to fight, and how to achieve the best results for his clients... One of the standout solicitors in shipping... Incredibly bright and sensible.”
My recent publications
News / Ince boosts international maritime team with hire of new Partner, Aris Moschopoulos
24-05-2021 / Maritime
Ince, the international legal and professional services firm, today further strengthened its world-leading shipping team with the appointment of Aris Moschopoulos as Partner in its Piraeus office.
News / Ince Piraeus adds lateral hire to expanding shipping team
18-01-2021 / Maritime
Ince has today announced the hire of Konstantinos (Dinos) Mexias as Partner in Piraeus, to strengthen its already world-leading shipping team.
Insights / Shipping E-Brief December 2020
03-12-2020 / Maritime
The Shipping E-Brief is a publication providing you with key information on legal decisions and developments in shipping and related business areas.
News / Supreme Court upholds bunker suppliers’ right to be paid where property did not pass
07-07-2016 / Maritime
PST Energy 7 Shipping LLC and another v. OW Bunker Malta Ltd and another (Res Cogitans)  UKSC 22 In a judgment handed down on 11 May 2016, the Supreme Court has upheld the Court of Appeal decision dated 22 October 2015 and confirmed that bunker suppliers who were unable to transfer property in bunkers supplied to a ship were nonetheless entitled to the price of the bunkers from the ship-owners (the “Owners”).
News / Court of Appeal confirms construction of in-transit loss clause in voyage charterparty
20-02-2015 / Maritime
Trafigura Beheer BV v. Navigazione Montanari SpA (Valle di Cordoba)  EWCA Civ 91 The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed the meaning of the expression "in-transit loss" ("ITL") in a voyage charterparty. In the High Court, it was held that (1) a loss by piracy does not fall within the meaning of "in-transit loss" so that the Owner would not be liable for loss so caused; and (2) if the Court was wrong and the type of loss did fall within the meaning of in-transit loss, then the Owner could nonetheless rely on the exceptions contained within the Hague-Visby Rules (the "Rules") that were incorporated in the charterparty. This decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal on both counts. Ince & Co. acted for the successful Owner in this important decision that clarifies how the in-transit loss regime operates and the type of losses that clauses such as this one are meant to cover. If the Owner had been held liable, P&I cover would have been lost because of the standard provisions in Club rules, providing that Club cover is lost if an owner agrees to a liability regime in his contract of carriage that is more onerous than the one contained in the Rules.
News / More pitfalls for owners looking to terminate for unpaid hire
20-10-2014 / Maritime
Januzaj v. Valilas  EWCA Civ 436 It is a debatable point whether or not the obligation to pay hire under a time charter is a condition of the contract or not, notwithstanding the obiter comments of Mr Justice Flaux in the Astra  EWHC 865 (see the Shipping E-Brief July 2013). Making payment under a commercial contract is said to be “not of the essence of the contract” and therefore not a condition. The significance is that a breach of condition allows the innocent party to terminate the contract in addition to claiming damages. Otherwise, he may be limited to his damages claim but unable to terminate the contract unless the failure to make payment, or indeed making repeated late payment under an instalment contract, amounts to a repudiatory breach of the contract.
News / Clarity remains the name of the game – it’s not bananas
15-04-2014 / Maritime
Trafigura Beheer BV v. Navigazione Montanari Spa (Valle di Cordoba)  EWHC 129 (Comm) The Commercial Court has recently considered the meaning of the expression “in-transit loss” in a voyage charterparty.
News / Buyers beware: sellers’ right to claim for an unpaid deposit
20-01-2014 / Maritime
Firodi Shipping Ltd v. Griffon Shipping Llc (Griffon)  EWCA Civ 1567 In a judgment handed down in December 2013, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of Mr Justice Teare in the Commercial Court in Griffon Shipping LLC v. Firodi Shipping Limited. The decision confirms that the sellers' remedy under clause 13 of the Norwegian Sale Form 1993 (NSF 93) where buyers fail to pay the deposit is a claim for the unpaid deposit and they are not limited to a claim for damages based on the difference between the market and contract price of the vessel. This has the effect of dramatically increasing the quantum of the sellers' claim in such circumstances and heralds a departure from the previously held view regarding the operation of clause 13.