Menu
Shipping E-Brief Winter 2015

News / / Shipping E-Brief Winter 2015

Shipping E-Brief Winter 2015 ArticlesBill of lading law and arbitration clause incorporates charterparty court jurisdiction provision(available as a podcast)Court grants anti-suit injunction in respect of some but not all cargo claims(available as a podcast)General Average dealing with the costs of a hijacking(available as a podcast)When does an indorsee of a bill of lading have title to sue the carrierDelayed delivery the right to cancel shipbuilding contractsBeware the pitfalls of inconsistent dispute resolution clausesWhen an English jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading will be deemed exclusiveWho pays the Suez Canal feesConsecutive time charters check your contract termsnbspCourt sets aside arbitration award for serious irregularitynbspAn update on the IMO's proposed Polar CodeThe entry into force of the Nairobi Convention on Wreck Removal is it a big deal(available as a podcast)Global anti-corruption update January 2015 what's newMissed a previous edition Read them hereShipping E-Brief Autumn 2014Shipping E-Brief Summer 2014Shipping E-Brief Spring 2014
Wai Yue Loh

Wai Yue Loh Partner and Chief Representative of Beijing Office, Beijing; and Partner, Hong Kong

Max Cross

Max Cross Partner

Related sectors:

Related services:

Related news & insights

News / Ince celebrates one year since Scotland office opening

23-11-2022 / Insurance, Maritime, Real Estate

We are pleased to be celebrating one year since opening our first Scottish office in the city of Glasgow.  Stefanie Johnston, dual-qualified Partner and Head of Scotland, has worked tirelessly over the last year to develop our offering through the opening of an Ince office in what is arguably an established Scottish market. Starting from the ground up, Stefanie and her team have successfully gained an admirable reputation in the region and further afield in the maritime, insurance, real estate and regulatory sectors. 

Ince celebrates one year since Scotland office opening

News / Shipping E-brief November 2022

17-11-2022 / Maritime

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

Shipping E-brief November 2022

News / Appeals from arbitration: is reform required?

15-11-2022 / Maritime

In September 2022, the UK Law Commission published a consultation paper with provisional recommendations for updating the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act 1996). Amongst other things, the Law Commission considered whether any changes need to be made to: (i) s.67 of the Act 1996, which deals with jurisdictional challenges to arbitral awards; and (ii) s.69 of the Act 1996, which deals with appeals on points of law.

Appeals from arbitration: is reform required?

News / Owners not in breach of charter and entitled to claim demurrage

09-11-2022 / Maritime

CM P-MAX III Limited v. Petroleos Del Norte SA (MT Stena Primorsk) [2022] EWHC 2147 (Comm) This recent laytime and demurrage dispute demonstrates that an owner can legitimately refuse orders where such orders may jeopardise the safety of a vessel.

Owners not in breach of charter and entitled to claim demurrage

News / Court of Appeal finds owner should have accepted non-contractual performance

09-11-2022 / Maritime

Mur Shipping BV v. RTI Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1406 A majority of the Court of Appeal has held that the Owner under a contract of affreightment (COA) should have accepted payment of freight in Euros, rather than the US dollars provided for in the COA. Its refusal to do so meant that the Owner could not rely on the force majeure clause in the COA, in circumstances where US sanctions might have restricted US dollar transfers from or on behalf of the Charterer.

Court of Appeal finds owner should have accepted non-contractual performance

News / “Due” means due!

03-11-2022 / Maritime

Ceto Shipping Corporation v. Savory Inc (Victor 1) [2022] EWHC 2636 (Comm) The Court in this case had to construe a purchase option clause in a bareboat charter. Specifically, it considered whether the fact that the charterer had not fulfilled certain payment obligations under the charter because it was disputing them in good faith meant that the owner was not obliged to transfer title to the vessel at the end of the charter period.

“Due” means due!