swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Transport - From: 1994 To: 1994
This page lists 18 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
The Sormovskiy 3068 [1994] 2 Lloyds Rep 266
1994
QBD
Clarke J
Contract, Transport, Commercial
It makes commercial sense to have a simple rule that in the absence of an express term of the contract the master must only deliver the cargo to the holder of the bill of lading who presents it to him. In that way both the shipowners and the persons in truth entitled to possession of the cargo are protected by the terms of the contract.
1 Citers
The Carnival [1994] 2 Lloyds Rep 14
1994
Transport
1 Citers
Aggeliki Charis Compania Maritima SA v Pagnan SpA The Angelic Grace [1994] 1 Lloyds Rep 168
1994
QBD
Rix J
Transport, Contract, Arbitration
The court considered whether a claim for a collision between two ships was governed by an arbitration clause which read "all disputes from time to time arising out of this contract shall . . be referred to the arbitrament of two arbitrators carrying on business in London." Held: The proceedings in a foreign jurisdiction were to be restrained by reason of agreement to submit to arbitration in England.
Rix J said: "collision claims I n the present case raised disputes which are within the arbitration clause. To some extent the claims in contract and in tort are true alternatives (for example the charterers' counterclaim). To some extent they may not be true alternatives, but they clearly overlap (as in the owners' claims for breach of the warranty of safety and for fault in collision) In any event all claims and cross-claims arise out of the same incident, the identical set of facts which have to be investigated by the arbitrators . . The parties clearly contemplated that a collision or other accident of navigation could give rise to a charterparty dispute."
1 Cites
1 Citers
Prekookeanska Plovidba v Felstar Shipping Corporation and Sotromar Srl Ind Summary, 14 March 1994
14 Mar 1994
CA
Transport
Damage caused to ships after collision with fender were to be shared.
Niobe Maritime Corporation v Tradax Ocean Transportation Sa Ind Summary, 21 March 1994
21 Mar 1994
CA
Transport
'coming to their knowledge before delivery' implied test of future knowledge.
Seabord Offshore Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport Independent, 24 March 1994; Gazette, 11 May 1994; Times, 25 March 1994
25 Mar 1994
HL
Vicarious Liability, Transport
The Act does not impose vicarious liability on the owners of ships for the omissions of their reasonably and properly instructed agents or employees.
Merchant Shipping Act 1988 31
Owners of Cargo On K H Enterprise v Owners of Pioneer Container Times, 29 March 1994; Gazette, 11 May 1994; [1994] 2 AC 324
29 Mar 1994
PC
Lord Goff
Transport, Commonwealth, Contract, Agency
Owners who were claiming under a bailment must accept the terms of a sub-bailment to which it had agreed. This result is both principled and just. A sub-bailee can only be said for these purposes to have voluntarily taken into his possession the goods of another if he has sufficient notice that a person other than a bailee is interested in the goods so that it can properly be said that (in addition to his duties to the bailee) he has, by taking the goods into his custody, assumed towards that other person the responsibility for the goods which is characteristic of a bailee. This they believe to be the underlying principle.
Where an exclusive jurisdiction clause exists, a party who seeks a stay brought in breach of that agreement to refer disputes to a named forum, will have to show strong cause
Lord Goff asked whether an exclusive jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading issued by a sub-bailee was binding on the cargo owner, and said: "Here is a ship, upon which the goods are loaded in a large number of containers; indeed, one container may contain goods belonging to a number of cargo owners. One incident may affect goods owned by several cargo owners, or even (as here) all the cargo owners with goods on board. Common sense and practical convenience combine to demand that all of these claims should be dealt with in one jurisdiction, in accordance with one system of law. If this cannot be achieved, there may be chaos. Much expense may be wasted on litigation in a number of different jurisdictions, as indeed happened in the present case, where there was litigation in eight other countries as well as Hong Kong and Taiwan. There is however no international regime designed to produce a uniformity of jurisdiction and governing law in the case of a multiplicity of claims of this kind. It is scarcely surprising therefore that shipowners seek to achieve uniformity of treatment in respect of all such claims, by clauses designed to impose an exclusive jurisdiction and an agreed governing law . . Within reason, such an attempt must be regarded with a considerable degree of sympathy and understanding . . Their Lordships do not consider that it can possibly be said that the incorporation of such a clause in a bill of lading is per se unreasonable."
1 Citers
Marida Ltd and Others v Oswal Steel and Others Times, 02 May 1994; Gazette, 08 June 1994
2 May 1994
HL
Transport
Ship owners may claim for the cost of interim repairs in average, but still subject to the overall limits imposed by the rules.
York-Antwerp Rules 1974
Effort Shipping Co Ltd v Linden Management Sa and Another (The Glannis Nk) Times, 05 May 1994
5 May 1994
QBD
Transport
A danger to the goods on board a ship made the cargo physically dangerous. The ship's master was responsible.
1 Citers
Zeeland Navigation Co Ltd v Banque Worms [1995] 1 Lloyd's Rep 251
15 Jun 1994
ComC
Rix J
Transport
The court decided that a notice under ship mortgage was valid to authorise the arrest and sale of the ship.
1 Citers
Triad Shipping Co v Stellar Chartering and Brokerage Inc ('The Island Archon'); CA 8-Jul-1994 - Times, 08 July 1994; Independent, 20 July 1994; [1994] 2 Lloyds Rep 227
Mediterranean Freight Services Ltd v BP Oil International Ltd (The Fiona); CA 27-Jul-1994 - Times, 27 July 1994; Ind Summary, 01 August 1994; [1994] 2 Lloyd's Rep 506
Petrograde Inc v Stinnes Handel Gmbh Times, 27 July 1994
27 Jul 1994
QBD
Transport
Statement of port of delivery is a contract term in FOB shipping contract.
The Anna H Times, 05 August 1994; Independent, 08 September 1994
5 Aug 1994
CA
Transport
The motives behind the arrest of a ship for security were irrelevant. The UK has jurisdiction.
International Convention Relating to the Arrest of Seagoing Ships 1952
Aectra Refining and Marketing Inc v Exmar NN Ind Summary, 22 August 1994; Times, 15 August 1994; [1995] 1 All ER 641; [1994] 1 WLR 1634
15 Aug 1994
CA
Hoffman LJ, Hirst LJ
Litigation Practice, Transport
A time loss claim can found a legal set-off claim against ship owners, provided that the loss claim can be made in the same court. The court referred to a "transaction set-off and independent set-off". Cross-claims must both be due and payable, and either liquidated or capable of being quantified by reference to ascertainable facts that do not, in their nature, require estimation or valuation.
Hoffman LJ reaffirmed the procedural character of legal set-off, saying: "Independent set-off, as its name suggests, does not require any relationship between the transactions out of which the cross claims arise. In English law it is based on section 13 of the Insolvent Debtors Relief Act 1729 . . The procedural basis of independent set-off is reflected in the rule that the mere existence of liquidated cross-claims does not automatically extinguish the smaller debt . . It operates only by express or implied agreement or through the judicial process by which the account is taken. As Sir George Jessel MR said in Talbot v Frere (1878) 9 ChD, 568, 573 "there could not be a set-off until action brought and set-off pleaded." The Act of 1729 is expressed in procedural terms"
1 Cites
1 Citers
Kuwait Petroleum Corporation v I and D Oil Carriers Ltd Independent, 17 August 1994
17 Aug 1994
CA
Transport
Ship owners had right to delay a ship's sailing to check the charterers orders in a potential war situation.
Torvald Klaveness A/S v Arni Maritime Corporation (The Gregos); HL 28-Oct-1994 - Independent, 15 November 1994; Times, 28 October 1994; [1994] 1 WLR 1465; [1995] 1 Lloyd's Rep 1
The owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship 'Tatry' v The owners of the ship 'Maciej Rataj'; ECJ 6-Dec-1994 - Times, 28 December 1994; C-406/92; [1994] EUECJ C-406/92; [1995] 1 Lloyd's Rep 302; [1995] ILPr 81; [1999] QB 515; [1995] All ER (EC) 229; [1994] ECR I-5439; [1995] CLC 275; [1999] 2 WLR 181
