Timothy Young QC (instructed by Skinitis ) for the claimant; Andrew Baker QC and Daniel Bovensiepen (instructed by Holman Fenwick Willan LLP ) for the defendant.
The claimant owners chartered a vessel to the defendant. The charterparty contained an off-hire clause which provided that should the vessel be seized or detained, payment of hire “shall be suspended … unless such capture or seizure or detention is occasioned by any personal act or omission or default of the charterers or their agents”. Unloading of the cargo was prohibited for a period of time due to detention of the vessel following an arrest order obtained by T. The defendant withheld hire payment for that period. A dispute arose between the parties as to whether the off-hire clause applied and the matter was referred to arbitration. The claimant contended that the seizure or detention of the vessel was occasioned by agents of the defendant so that the proviso in the clause applied. The majority of the arbitral tribunal rejected the claimant’s case. The claimant appealed under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The court had to determine the meaning and effect of the words “occasioned by any personal act or omission or default of the charterers or their agents” in the off-hire clause.
At para 19, the judge construed those words in the clause in the context of the charterparty as a whole, including the provisions that contemplated the charter being operated by each party through agents. At para 20, the judge concluded that T’s mistaken arrest of the vessel was not an act done by it as part of carrying out any responsibility delegated to it by the defendant; but that while the majority of the tribunal had erred in rejecting the claimant’s claim based on T having been the defendant’s agent, the tribunal had not erred in rejecting the claim on the ground that there was no evidence that T had performed the defendant’s obligation to discharge. The judge dealt, at paras 24 and 25, with the issue of the causal relationship between the act or omission with the seizure or detention of the vessel and decided, at para 27, to remit that matter to the tribunal under section 69(7) of the Arbitration Act 1996.
Arbitration Act 1996, s 69