The owner of a ship, the defendant, sought payment direct. The time charterer had become insolvent, but the ship had been sub-chartered to the claimant. The owner sought to exercise his lien over the cargo, but the sub-charterer had discharged his own liabilities.
Held: The ship owner was obliged to discharge, and to do so within a reasonable time. A general incorporation of a charter party’s terms into a bill of lading only incorporates terms relating to the shipment, carriage and discharge of the cargo, and not other terms. Even if a term that a shipper is responsible for discharging can be implied into a standard bill of lading, a regime is not to be implied in a bill of lading which would excuse a shipper from liability for discharge and place it solely on a receiver or charterer.
Judges:
Lord Justice Henry, Lord Justice Brooke And Lord Justice Rix
Citations:
[2000] EWCA Civ 217
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Leduc v Ward 1888
A transferee of a bill of lading is subject only to the obligations which appear in the bill of lading itself but not to any merely collateral terms. . .
Cited – Miramar Maritime Corporation v Holborn Oil Trading Limited (‘The Miramar’) HL 1984
A bill of lading incorporated a charterparty. The question was whether clauses in the charterparty or bill of lading prevailed. The charter clause incorporated a demurrage clause making the charterer’s laible for demurrage, and the owners asserted . .
Cited – Fowler v Knoop 1878
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport, Contract
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147250