Menu
Shipping E-Brief November 2018

News / / Beijing, Dubai, Hamburg, Hong Kong, Shipping E-Brief November 2018, 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 November 2018 edition of the Shipping E-Brief is full of articles dealing with topical shipping issues.  


Download the PDF version

Missed a previous edition? Read them here:

Shipping E-Brief October 2018

Shipping E-Brief July 2018

Shipping E-Brief March 2018

Related sectors:

Featured news & insights

News / When is an owner obliged to commence the approach voyage to the loadport?

29-11-2018 / Maritime

CSSA Chartering and Shipping Services SA v. Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd (Pacific Voyager) [2018] EWCA Civ 2413 The Court of Appeal has recently given its decision in this case, which will be of interest to all those involved in the chartering of vessels on a voyage basis. The Court of Appeal upheld the Commercial Court decision and found that the Owners’ failure to commence the approach voyage to the loadport by a particular date was a breach of the charterparty, notwithstanding that the charterparty did not give an ETA or Expected Ready to Load date.

When is an owner obliged to commence the approach voyage to the loadport?

Insights / Exceptions clause or contractual frustration provision? Not the same thing

29-11-2018 / Maritime

Classic Maritime Inc v. Limbungan Makmur SDN BHD [2018] EWHC 2389 (Comm) In this case, the Charterer failed in its attempt to excuse its non-performance under a contract of affreightment on the basis that a force majeure event – a burst dam that halted production at a Brazilian mine - had prevented it from shipping the relevant cargoes under the contract. However, the Owner could only recover nominal damages because even if the Charterer had been willing and able to perform its contractual obligations, the burst dam would have prevented its performance.

Exceptions clause or contractual frustration provision? Not the same thing

News / Could or would standard sanctions wordings leave underwriters exposed?

29-11-2018 / Maritime

Mamancochet Mining v. Aegis Managing Agency [2018] EWHC 2643 The Court has recently held that underwriters were obliged to pay a claim under a marine cargo insurance policy in respect of a cargo of steel sold to an Iranian national. This was the case notwithstanding the sanctions provision in the policy and President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the international agreement to ease economic sanctions against Iran, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (commonly referred to as the “JCPOA”). In determining the case, the Court was required to interpret the sanctions exclusion clause developed by the London market Joint Hull Committee and adopted by the Joint Cargo Committee.

Could or would standard sanctions wordings leave underwriters exposed?

News / Court dismisses appeal on whether vessel’s deviation was for a reasonable purpose

29-11-2018 / Maritime

Troy Maritime SA v. Clearlake Shipping Pte Ltd (MV Andreas) [2018] EWHC 2310 (Comm) The Court has recently dismissed an appeal by Owners on whether the arbitral Tribunal had made a mistake in law in finding that the vessel’s deviation had not been for a reasonable purpose. The Court agreed with the Charterers that this was a finding of fact and could not be appealed as a point of law.

Court dismisses appeal on whether vessel’s deviation was for a reasonable purpose

News / Supreme Court considers limitation under the Athens Convention

29-11-2018 / Maritime

Warner v. Scapa Flow Charters [2018] UKSC 52 The Supreme Court has clarified the scope, as a matter of UK law, of the time-bar provided for by Article 16 of the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea 1974 (the “Athens Convention”). The effect of section 18 of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 (the “1973 Act”), if the claim is brought on behalf of an individual who is a minor at the time of the incident giving rise to the claim, is to suspend the running of time for commencing an action until the claimant becomes an adult. Although a different limitation statute applies in England and Wales, the decision gives a strong indication of how similar cases might be decided here. There is considerable potential for this decision to prolong the period during which claims may emerge and be brought against the operators of ferries, cruise ships and other passenger vessels following fatal accidents.

Supreme Court considers limitation under the Athens Convention

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) [2018] 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.

Unnecessary strapping of cargo: Charterers pay for Master’s negligence

News / Charterers awarded lucrative damages despite weak market

29-11-2018 / Maritime

A v. B [2018] EWHC 2325 (Comm) This appeal from an LMAA arbitration award raised two questions in relation to the calculation of damages – can charterers claim for the loss of lucrative profits in an otherwise weak market, and can they claim wasted expenditure at the same time? The Court answered both questions with a clear yes.

Charterers awarded lucrative damages despite weak market

News / Will an arresting party ever have to produce a cross undertaking to the ship-owner?

29-11-2018 / Maritime

Natwest Markets plc (formerly RBS PLC) v. Stallion Eight Shipping Co. SA (MV Alkyon) [2018] [EWHC 2033 (Admlty) In this case, the Owners of an arrested ship applied to the Admiralty Court for a cross undertaking against the Bank (the arresting party) to pay damages arising as a result of the arrest. The Court rejected the application on the basis that it would cut across and negate the Claimant Bank’s right to obtain a warrant of arrest.

Will an arresting party ever have to produce a cross undertaking to the ship-owner?

News / ‘What’s aught but as ‘tis valued?’: Mortgagee’s duties on sale of vessel

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.

‘What’s aught but as ‘tis valued?’: Mortgagee’s duties on sale of vessel