Site icon swarb.co.uk

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co Ltd v Furness Withy (Australia) Pty (Doric Pride”): CA 25 Jan 2006″

References: [2006] EWCA Civ 599, [2007] 2 CLC 1042, [2006] 2 All ER (Comm) 188, [2006] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 175
Links: Bailii
Coram: Brooke, Rix LJJ, Sir Paul Kennedy
Ratio: 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 [1980] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 95 at 101 and The Mary Lou [1981] 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’.
This case cites:

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 06-Jun-18
Ref: 242539

Exit mobile version