The court considered the relationship between express an implied warranties.
Held: Under a time charterparty, hire continues to run unless the charterer can bring himself within the plain words of an off-hire provision; the risk of delay is thus essentially on the time charterer (rather than the owners).
Rix LJ, with whom Brooke LJ and Sir Paul Kennedy agreed, said at: ‘ Mr Cooper went on to cite examples of the effectiveness of an express safe port warranty, even in cases of charters to nominated ports such as The Helen Miller  2 Lloyd’s Rep. 95 at 101 and The Mary Lou  2 Lloyd’s Rep. 272. Those citations are, in my judgment, again apposite. It is of course standard law that express warranties and provisions must be given their true effect, such as they are, and that there is only room for the implication of an indemnity clause to the extent that the express provisions do not allocate risks in other inconsistent ways.’ ‘under a time charter the risk of delay is fundamentally on a time charterer, who remains liable to pay hire in all circumstances unless the charterer can bring himself within the plain words of an off-hire provision’.
Brooke, Rix LJJ, Sir Paul Kennedy
 EWCA Civ 599,  2 CLC 1042,  2 All ER (Comm) 188,  2 Lloyd’s Rep 175
England and Wales
At ComC – Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd. v Furness Withy (Australia) Pty (‘Doric Pride’) ComC 20-May-2005
Dispute about the meaning and effect of an ‘off hire’ clause in a single trip time charter. . .
Cited – NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) Nv v Cargill International Sa ComC 1-Feb-2013
The ship (Global Santosh), having been found with illicit drugs, was arrested in error, leading to considerable delays in unloading the cement cargo. The charterparty period off-hire clause (NYPE form) was applied and hire withheld by the head . .
Cited – NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) NV v Cargill International SA CA 8-Apr-2014
The court was asked as to ‘the true construction and application of a proviso to an off hire clause in a time charterparty, dealing with the capture, seizure, detention or arrest of the vessel. The issue thus raises the familiar question as to the . .
Cited – NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) Nv v Cargill International Sa SC 11-May-2016
The ship ‘Global Santosh’ had been arrested as a side issue in a dispute as to its cargo between its anticipated receiver and a sub-sub charterer.
Held: (Lord Clarke dissenting) The appeal succeeded. Any responsibility of Cargill under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242539