Source: https://archive.onlinedmc.co.uk/shipping_and_transport.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 23:46:18+00:00

Document:
This Section of the website contains Case Notes on the following cases. To access the Case Note, click on the name of the case.
Nile Dutch Africa Line B.V, Rotterdam, the Netherlands ("NDAL") v. (1) Delta Lloyd Schadeverzekering N.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands ("Delta Lloyd"), (2) Premium Tobacco Investments N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands ("Tobacco"), (3) M. Meerapfel Söhne A.G., Basel, Switzerland ("Meerapfel") and (4) CETAC, Douala, Cameroon ("Cetac") - The "NDS Provider"
TIME CHARTERPARTY: AMENDED NYPE 93 FORM: OFF-HIRE CLAUSE: CHARTERERS’ RIGHT TO CANCEL IF VESSEL OFF-HIRE FOR 20 CONSECUTIVE DAYS: CHARTERERS ORDERED VESSEL FROM YOKOHAMA TO SHANGHAI: VESSEL DAMAGED AND OFF-HIRE IN YOKOHAMA: VESSEL ORDERED BY OWNERS/CLASS TO REPAIR YARD IN GUANGZHOU VIA HONG KONG TO DISCHARGE ENTIRE CARGO: VESSEL ON "COMMON ROUTE" FOR HONG KONG AND SHANGHAI FOR 1½ DAYS: WHETHER VESSEL WAS OFF-HIRE FOR 20 CONSECUTIVE DAYS OR BACK ON HIRE WHILE ON "COMMON ROUTE"
Mediterranean Salvage & Towage Ltd v. Seamar Trading & Commerce Inc.
Andorra Services, Inc. and Chemoil Corp, Charterer v. Venfleet Ltd., as owner of the M/T "Eos"
CONTRACTS: INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS: CEMENT: SHIPPING: FOB CONTRACTS: WHETHER FAILURE OF SELLER TO SUPPLY CARGO AMOUNTED TO FRUSTRATION OF CONTRACT: WHETHER TERM TO BE IMPLIED THAT ‘ALL BETS WERE OFF’ IF THIRD PARTY INTERVENED TO PREVENT THE SUPPLY OF THE CARGO: CAN FAULT OF SUPPLIER BE IMPUTED TO THE SELLER IN THE ABSENCE OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN THEM?: WHICH PARTY BORE THE RISK OF FAILURE OF SUPPLY?
Trans-Tec Asia v. M/V "Harmony Container"
Reino de Espana v. The American Bureau of Shipping, Inc.
Robinson v. Orient Marine Co. Ltd., et al.
Emerald Shipping Corp. v. Elmhirst Pte., Ltd, as Owner of the "Neptune Dorado"
Cosmar Shipping Co. Ltd v. SLS Trading Company Inc.
The Owners of the Vessel "CSAV Tokyo" v. The Owners of the Vessel "KMTC Hong Kong"
1. International Transportation Service Inc. v. The Owners of the vessels "Convenience Container", "Kingdom Container" and "Liberty Container" ;2. Rudolf A. Oetker KG v. The Owners of the Vessels "Convenience Container", "Kingdom Container", "Liberty Container" and "Mandarin Container"
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: SALE ON FOB TERMS: BILL OF LADING MARKED "TO ORDER OF SHIPPER": CARRIER INSTRUCTED NOT TO RELEASE GOODS SAVE ON PRODUCTION OF FULL SET OF BILLS OF LADING: CARGO RELEASED CONTRARY TO INSTRUCTIONS: LIABILITY OF CARRIER: 9 MONTHS TIME LIMIT UNDER BILL OF LADING: MEANING OF "DELIVERY"
Cargo interests on board MV "Cita" v. Time-charterers of MV "Cita"
Owners and/or Demise Charterers of the m/v "Eleftheria" v Owners and/or Demise Charterers of the m/v "Hakki Deval"
Asoma Corp. v. SK Shipping Co., Ltd.
Invocation of ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION: Whether equipment onboard a ship within scope of "goods carried in a ship"
Stolt-Nielsen SA v. Animalfeeds International Corp.
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE: LIMITATION PERIOD FOR CLAIM: S.14(A) LIMITATION ACT 1980: WHAT KNOWLEDGE IN THE CLAIMANT WILL START LIMITATION PERIOD RUNNING: IS KNOWLEDGE THAT HE HAS A CLAIM REQUIRED OR DOES ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE TO INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY OF A CLAIM SUFFICE?
APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE ARBITRATION AWARD: ARBITRATION ACT 1996, S. 67(1): JURISDICTION OF ARBITRATOR TO HEAR CLAIM: PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE: MEANING OF "ANY DISPUTE": WHETHER REFUSAL TO PAY A SUM ADMITTED AS DUE IS A "DISPUTE"
TIME CHARTER: AMENDED NYPE FORM: CLAUSE 8 – "CHARTERERS ARE TO LOAD, STOW … THE CARGO … UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE CAPTAIN": PROPER CONSTRUCTION: DANGEROUS CARGO STOWED NEAR HEATED BUNKER TANK: UNSEAWORTHINESS: EXPLOSION: DAMAGE TO VESSEL AND CARGO: WHETHER OWNERS OWED CHARTERERS A DUTY TO INTERVENE IN STOWAGE TO ENSURE SEAWORTHINESS OF SHIP: WHETHER OWNERS HAD A DEFENCE UNDER ART. IV.2(a) OF HAGUE/HAGUE-VISBY RULES THAT CLAIM AROSE FROM "ACT, NEGLECT OR DEFAULT … IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SHIP"
Vestoil, Ltd. v. M/V "M Pioneer"
Transatlantic Lines, Llc., as Charterer, v. Tidewater Marine, Inc, as Owner of the "Sly Fox"
Safezone Pty Limited v The Ship "Island Sun"
In re Otal Investments Ltd. – the MV "Kariba"
United States: Supreme Court: Anthony M. Kennedy, Justice: June 6, 2005: No. 03-1388: 545 U.S.
Transport insurer of X. v. freight forwarder Y – M/V "Atlantic Concert"
American Home Assurance Co. v. CSX Lines, Inc.
Curtis Callais Welding, Inc. v. Stolt Comex Seaway Holdings, Inc.
Maersk Line Limited, as Charterers v. U.S. Ship Management Inc. as Disponent Owner of the "Sealand Express"
Edlow International Company v. BBC Chartering & Logistics GmbH & Co. KG.
Chembulk Trading LLC v. Chemex Ltd.; Novorossiysk Company v. Chemex Ltd.
Maritime: time-charter party; freights: sub-freights: contractual lien: maritime lien: Whether "freights" includes "sub-freights"
Alphapoint Shipping Ltd v. (1) Rotem Amfert Negev Ltd (2) Dead Sea Works Ltd - MV "Agios Dimitrios"
Stevens Technical Services, Inc. v. Mormac Marine Enterprises, Inc.
First Commercial Bank and Others v. the Owners of "Mandarin Container", "Kingdom Container" and "Liberty Container"
Owners of Cargo lately laden on board the "LIAN SHUN" v. The Owners of the "LIAN SHUN"
Jindal Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and Others v. Islamic Solidarity Company Jordan Inc. – the "Jordan II"
VESSEL SUNK FROM DAMAGE BY CONTAMINATED NITRIC ACID TRANSFERRED FROM ANOTHER VESSEL: DUTY OF CARE OWED BY OWNERS OF TRANSFEROR VESSEL TO INFORM OWNERS OF RECIPIENT VESSEL OF CHARACTERISTICS OF DANGEROUS cargo: WHETHER OWNERS OF TRANSFEROR VESSEL negligent: whether can limit liability: whether "actual fault or privity"
More OG Romsdal Fylkesbatar AS -v- The Demised Charterers of the Ship "Jotunheim"
General Maritime Management LLC v. ST Shipping & Transport, Inc.
CONTRACT: CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: DUTY TO RETURN CONTAINERS: LIABILITY OF "MERCHANTS": LIABILITY OF CONSIGNEE WHERE CONTAINERS UNPACKED BY CONSIGNEE’S CUSTOMERS: MEANING OF "MERCHANT"
Becker v. Poling Transportation Co.
Slebent Shipping Company Ltd v. Associated Transport Line LLC, the "Star B"
Sea Goddess Shipholding Inc. v. Standard Tankers Bahamas Ltd.
Complaint of Murmansk Shipping as Owner and Manager of the M/V Ivan Susanin, for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability – The "Anangel Endeavour"
Admiral Chartering Ltd v Owners of Ship or Vessel "Rainbow Spring"
(1) Petroleo Brasileiro SA v. Kriti Akti Shipping Co SA ; (2) Kriti Akti Shipping Co SA v.
Petroleo Brasileiro SA (The ‘Kriti Akti’).
Feoso Maritime Co Ltd v Faith Maritime Co Ltd; The "Daphne L"
Astra Oil Company, Inc. v. Rover Navigation, Ltd.
Shipping: Charter party: Arbitration: When May A Non-Party Compel Arbitration?
Weintraub & Sons, Inc. v. E.T.A. Transportation, Inc.
Otto Candies v. Nippon Kaiji Kyokai Corp.
UCO Bank v Golden Shore Transportation Pte Ltd; The "Asean Pioneer"
BNP Paribas v Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd; The "Victoria Cob"
Glencore International AG v. Owners of the "Cherry", the "Epic" and the "Addax"
CARRIAGE BY AIR: DAMAGE TO CARGO: WARSAW CONVENTION: LIMITATION: CLAIMANT’S RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS: ART. 22(4): PAYMENT IN: MEANING OF "DAMAGES"
Okta Crude Oil Refinery AD v Mamidoil-Jetoil; Greek Petroleum Co. SA v. Moil-Coal Trading Co. Ltd.
Evergreen International S.A. v Volkswagen Group & Others - The "Ever Glory"
Trafigura Beheer BV v. Golden Stavraetos Maritime Inc.
United States District Court, Southern District of New York: Hon. Naomi Reice Buchwald: Docket No. 02 Civ. 4398 (NRB): March 21, 2003.
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: TAX SEALS: CMR CONVENTION: SUCCESSIVE CARRIAGE UNDER SINGLE CONTRACT: CARRIAGE UNDER SERIES OF SEPARATE CONTRACTS: GOODS LOST IN CUSTODY OF SUB-BAILEE: BAILOR BOUND BY TERMS OF BAILMENT FROM BAILEE TO SUB-BAILEE: CMR ARTICLE 36: CAN INTERMEDIATE BAILEE BE SUED: LOSSES ARISING UNDER GUARANTEE TO EXCISE AUTHORITIES: ARTICLE 23: WHETHER LOSSES CAN BE REGARDED AS PART OF VALUE OF GOODS OR AS "OTHER CHARGES"
Admiral Chartering Ltd v Owners of Ship "Rainbow Spring"
Jindal Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., TCI Trans Commodities AG and Hiansa SA v. Islamic Solidarity Co. Jordan Inc. – the "Jordan II"
The Owners of Cargo on board the ship "Brij" v. The Owners of the ship "Brij"
International Coffee and Fertilizer Trading Co. v. Mermaid Shipping Co. Ltd.
Kinetics Technology v. Cross Seas Shipping, the "Mosconici"
Owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship "David Agmashenebeli" v Owners of the Ship "David Agmashenebeli"
Sumitomo Corporation (Singapore) Pte Ltd v The Owners of the Ship "Alexandrea"
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: Judges Garwood, Wiener and Fallon: June 10, 2002.
Priority of maritime lien for breach of charter: inchoate lien: perfected lien.
Glencore Grain Ltd. v. Flacker Shipping Ltd. "The Happy Day"
Aceros Prefabricados, S.A. v. TradeArbed, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Miner, Calabresi and Cabranes; 282 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2002); February 13, 2002.
Glencore International AG v. Owners of the "CHERRY"
Boulos Gad Tourism & Hotels Ltd. v Uniground Shipping Company Ltd.
Case Note based on an Article in the March 2002 Edition of the ‘Bulletin’, published by the Marine and Insurance teams at the international firm of lawyers, DLA.
Heung-A Shipping Co. Ltd. v. New Rank (Holdings) Ltd, Excel World Container Line Ltd. and Best Trend Enterprises Ltd.
Trane Company v. Hanjin Shipping Co. Ltd.
Elaine L. Chao, Secretary of Labor, Petitioner v. Mallard Bay Drilling, Inc.
Center Optical (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Jardine Transport Services (China) Ltd.
Michael S Evryalos Maritime Ltd v. China Pacific Insurance Co Ltd - " The Michael S"
Case Note contributed by Sharon Yeo, lawyer at Ebsworth & Ebsworth Lawyers, Melbourne.; Ebsworth and Ebsworth Lawyers are the International Contributors for Australia.
TICC Limited v. COSCO (UK) Ltd.
South African Marine Corporation v. Atlantic Reliance Shipping Co.
Charles Haddon-Cave QC instructed by Ince & Co for South African Marine Corporation, the owner.
Louis Dreyfus Negoce SA v. Blystad Shipping & Trading Inc.
European Gas Turbines Ltd v. (1) MSAS Cargo International, (2) Hapag-Lloyd AG and (3) Hapag-Lloyd (UK) Ltd.
Ultimate Lady Limited v. the "Northern Challenger"
Dairy Containers Ltd v. Tasman Orient Line, the "Tasman Discoverer"
New South Wales Supreme Court: Barrett J.
TOWAGE CONTRACT: BIMCO TOWHIRE CONDITIONS: DAMAGE ARISING FROM ACCIDENT INVOLVING TOW: THIRD PARTY CLAIMS: UNSEAWORTHINESS OF TUG: KNOCK FOR KNOCK AGREEMENTS: CONVENTION ON LIMITATION FOR MARINE CLAIMS: MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT 1995: APPLICATION TO KNOCK-FOR-KNOCK AGREEMENTS.
MEASURE OF DAMAGES FOR TORTIOUS DESTRUCTION OF CHATTELS: REPLACEMENT VALUE OR MARKET VALUE: REQUIREMENTS OF REASONABLENESS: RELEVANCE OF INTENTION TO REINSTATE.
INTER-CLUB AGREEMENT: NEW YORK PRODUCE EXCHANGE FORM OF C/P: CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO Bs/L FOR INTER-CLUB AGREEMENT TO APPLY.
Borealis Ab v. Stargas Ltd. and Bergesen D.Y. A/S, the "Berge Sisar"
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT, 1992: DELIVERY AND DEMAND FOR DELIVERY UNDER Section 3(1)(c): EXTINCTION OF LIABILITIES ON SUBSEQUENT TRANSFER under Section 2(1).
VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: COMMENCEMENT OF LAYTIME: NOTICE OF READINESS REQUIRED.
VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: ARBITRATION CLAUSE: INCORPORATION INTO BILLS OF LADING.
1 Where a ship is chartered on terms that require the master to prosecute voyages with the utmost despatch and to follow the orders of the charterers as to the employment of the ship, the ship is bound to obey charterers’ orders regarding the route to be followed, unless owners can show sound reasons – such as danger to the ship – for following a different course.
2 If the master does not follow orders validly given by the charterers, the owners will not be able to rely on the exception of ‘error in navigation’ set out in Article IV Rule 2(a) of the Hague Rules.
These Case Notes have been prepared with care, but neither the Editor nor the International and other Contributors can guarantee that they are free from error, nor that they contain every pertinent point. Reliance should not therefore be placed upon them without independent verification. The Editor and the International and other Contributors disclaim all liability for any loss of whatsoever nature and howsoever arising as a result of others acting or refraining from acting in reliance on the contents of this website and the information to which it gives access. The Editor claims copyright in the content of the website.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 ART. 22
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.