The defendants chartered a ship to proceed from England to a safe port in Chilli, with laave to call at Valparaiso. On her arrival at Valparaiso; the charterers’ agent named the port of Carrisal Bajo as the port of discharge, and directed the master to proceed thither, At the time Carrisal Bajo was named as the port of discharge, that port was closed by order of the Chilian government, and the ship could not proceed thither without confiscation. The ship was consequently detained for some time at Valparaiso, and, on the port being opened, sailed for Carrisal Bajo and there discharged her cargo. Held, that the charterers were liable in damages to the shipowner for the detention of the ship at Valparaiso as they had not named a ‘safe port ” within the meanin of the charter-party.
 EngR 1001, (1861) 1 B and S 773, (1861) 121 ER 901
England and Wales
Cited – Gard Marine and Energy Ltd and Another v China National Chartering Company Ltd and Another SC 10-May-2017
The dispute followed the grounding of a tanker the Ocean Victory. The ship was working outside of a safe port requirement in the charterparty agreement. The contract required the purchase of insurance against maritime war and protection and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.284762