Minerva Navigation Inc v Oceana Shipping AG
Oceana Shipping AG v Transatlantica Commodities SA
[2012] EWHC 3608 (Comm)
QBD
13 December 2012
Walker J
Appearances

Richard Lord QC (instructed by Holman Fenwick Willan LLP ) for the claimant in the first claim.

The defendant did not appear and was not represented.

Stewart Buckingham (instructed by Whale Rock Legal Ltd ) for the defendant in the second claim.

The claimant did not appear and was not represented.

SHIPPINGCharterpartyTime charterConstruction of off hire clause in charterpartyWhether vessel off hire for particular period due to not being efficient for services required for that periodWhether charterers having to further show net loss of time resulting

The claimant in the first claim, Minerva Navigation Inc, entered into a charterparty with the defendant, Oceana Shipping AG, with Minerva as owners and Oceana as charterers. Oceana then entered into a sub-charterparty with the defendant in the second claim, Transatlantica Commodities SA. Both charterparties were on amended New York Produce Exchange (“NYPE”) 1946 forms. Disputes arose between Transatlantica and Oceana which were mirrored by disputes between Oceana and Minerva. The disputes were referred to arbitration under the head charterparty. The claim by Transatlantica was for sums for hire during a period in which the vessel was drifting at sea. Oceana passed that claim on to Minerva. The arbitrators found that the sums claimed were recoverable under the off hire clause. Minerva and Oceana appealed. In issue was the meaning of the off hire clause in the charterparties and whether under that clause the vessel was off hire for a particular period merely because it was not efficient for the services required during that period or whether the charterers had to also show a net loss of time.

Decision

The judge, having considered a number of authorities at paras 45–83, concluded, at para 84, that the off-hire clause permitted the charterers to deduct time for the duration of the off hire event but only to the extent that there was a net loss of time to the chartered service. It was not sufficient for the charterers merely to show that, as regards the service immediately required, there was a net loss of time. The arbitrators erred in their findings on that issue. There was no net loss and the appeals were allowed.

Relevant cases considered
Forestships International Ltd v Armonia Shipping & Finance Corpn (The Ira) [1995] 1 Lloyd's Rep 103
Hogarth v Miller [1891] AC 48, HL(E)
Sidermar SpA v Apollo Corpn [1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 200
Sig Bergesen DY & Co v Mobil Shipping and Transportation Co (The Berge Sund) [1993] 2 Lloyd's Rep 453, CA
TS Lines Ltd v Delphis NV [2009] EWHC 933 (Comm)
Western Sealanes Corp v Unimarine SA (The Pythia) [1982] 2 Lloyd's Rep 160

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies