header-logo header-logo

SHIPPING—CHARTERPARTY—SAFE PORT

24 May 2007
Issue: 7274 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

AIC Ltd v Marine Pilot Ltd [2007] EWHC 1182 (Comm), [2007] All ER (D) 280(May)

Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court)
Gloster J
17 May 2007

The phrase “1 safe port Ventspils” in an amended Asbatankvoy form is not merely a mutual agreement between the owner and charterer that the port is in fact safe, but a warranty by the charterer; moreover, a port can be rendered unsafe because of a need for lightering to get into or out of it. “Safely” means “safely as a laden ship”; there can be no distinction between loading and discharging.

Steven Berry QC and Edmund King (instructed by Holman Fenwick) for the claimant.  Timothy Young QC (instructed by Eversheds) for the defendant.

The proceedings concerned a charter substantially on the Asbatankvoy form and incorporating the charterer’s standard terms. The vessel was an Aframax oil tanker. The voyages were to load gasoil “1 safe port Ventspils” with discharge to various ports in named locations. A dispute arose concerning the sixth voyage, when the vessel arrived at Venspils to load a cargo. Due to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll