Menu
Shipping E-Brief March 2018

News / / Beijing, Dubai, Hamburg, Hong Kong, Shipping E-Brief March 2018, Shipping E-Brief March 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 March 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 January 2018

Shipping E-Brief November 2017

Shipping E-Brief September 2017

Related sectors:

Featured news & insights

News / Blockchain - the answer to all your problems?

13-02-2018 / Maritime

In 2017, the maritime industry was awash with predictions of the potential for blockchain technology to enhance communication, allow transparency across the supply chain and thereby streamline traditionally paper-based trade processes. Ultimately, blockchain would be expected to combat the current fragmentation across the industry by making processes more efficient.

Blockchain - the answer to all your problems?

News / Court of Appeal confirms that package limitation under the Hague Rules does not apply to bulk cargo

15-03-2018 / Maritime

Sea Tank Shipping AS v. Vinnlustodin HF and another (Aqasia) [2018] EWCA Civ 276 The Court of Appeal has recently unanimously upheld the Commercial Court decision handed down at the end of 2016, confirming that package limitation under the Hague Rules does not apply to bulk cargo. This decision provides further clarity in the long-standing debate as to whether “unit” in Article IV Rule 5 of the Hague Rules refers to a physical item of cargo or a shipping unit, or is a reference to a unit of measurement used to denominate or quantify the cargo in the contract of carriage and is thus capable of applying to bulk cargo.

Court of Appeal confirms that package limitation under the Hague Rules does not apply to bulk cargo

News / Knowing when it’s time to say goodbye: Notices of Abandonment

23-03-2018 / Maritime

Sveriges Angfartygs Assurans Forening (The Swedish Club) v. Connect Shipping Inc (MV Renos) [2018] EWCA Civ 230 The Court of Appeal has recently upheld a first instance decision in a case that required the Court to consider the following issues: (i) at what point an insured is held to have received “reliable information” of a constructive total loss (“CTL”); (ii) how soon after having received “reliable information” the insured is required to give Notice of Abandonment to their insurers; and (iii) whether expenses incurred by the insured prior to the Notice of Abandonment (“NOA”) and SCOPIC fees paid to salvors count towards the CTL calculation.

Knowing when it’s time to say goodbye: Notices of Abandonment

News / Does a claim for time spent “waiting for charterers’ orders” fall within a 90 day demurrage time bar provision?

23-03-2018 / Maritime

Lukoil Asia Pacific Pte Limited v. Ocean Tankers (Pte) Limited (Ocean Neptune) [2018] EWHC 163 (Comm) Does a claim for “waiting for charterers’ orders” fall within a 90 day demurrage time bar? On the wording of this particular charter, the Court said that it did. As a result, the Shipowners were unable to recover any damages in respect of seven weeks spent awaiting Charterers’ orders. Shipowners beware!

Does a claim for time spent “waiting for charterers’ orders” fall within a 90 day demurrage time bar provision?

News / Business common sense applied to construing arbitration clause in contract of affreightment

23-03-2018 / Maritime

Flota Petrolera Ecuatoriana v. Petroleos de Venezuala S.A. [2017] EWHC 3630 (Comm) This judgment is important for two reasons. Legally speaking, it looks at the English Court’s approach to deciding the law of a contract where the parties have not specifically expressed their choice. Procedurally speaking, it focuses on circumstances in which the English Court may allow service of a claim form, which would otherwise have to be served in a different jurisdiction, on a party’s appointed English solicitors.

Business common sense applied to construing arbitration clause in contract of affreightment

News / The importance of getting parties’ names right when issuing proceedings

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.

The importance of getting parties’ names right when issuing proceedings

News / Taking the garbage out: Latest amendments to Marpol Annex V on garbage from ships

23-03-2018 / Maritime

Since we last reported on MARPOL Annex V in May 2013 (see our previous article), there have been further amendments made to the Annex. These amendments are contained within the International Maritime Organisation’s (“IMO”) Resolution MEPC.277(70) and were adopted by the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee (“MEPC”) in October 2016. They took effect on 1 March 2018 and require vessels to implement changes associated with the handling, management and record-keeping of garbage on-board. This article considers the main amendments to MARPOL Annex V and their practical implications.

 Taking the garbage out: Latest amendments to Marpol Annex V on garbage from ships