The Top 10 English Maritime Cases from 2021

The English courts have been kept busy with a variety of interesting and significant maritime cases throughout 2021 and North FD&D Consultant Jim Leighton shares his summary of the top 10 judgments to take note of.

The Alexandra 1 and Ever Smart [2021] UKSC 6

Where an outbound vessel in a narrow channel is crossing with an approaching vessel so as to involve a risk of collision, the crossing rules are not overridden by the narrow channel rules merely because the approaching vessel is intending and preparing to enter the narrow channel, with the crossing rules only being overridden if and when the approaching vessel is shaping to enter, adjusting her course so as to reach the entrance on her starboard side, on her final approach.

Read more: The Ever Smart and Alexandria I Collision- What does it mean?

The New Hydra [2021] EWHC 566 (Comm)

Where under a time charterparty the daily hire is calculated based on the average of routes published by the Baltic Exchange over the previous 15 days plus 4% for size adjustment (to account for the chartered 179,258 tonnes vessel being larger than the 172,000 tonnes “benchmark” ship used for the Baltic Cape Index). When the benchmark ship was later adjusted to 180,000 tonnes by the Baltic Exchange during the charter period, there is an implied term that the size adjustment should be reasonably revised in light of the change.

The Mookda Naree [2021] EWHC 558 (Comm)

Where a vessel was arrested in West Africa due to a dispute unrelated to her but related to a different West African cargo shipment of her sub-charterer on another vessel. Clause 86, which made the charterer responsible for West African third-party cargo claims, putting up security for her release from arrest and kept her on-hire, did not bite to keep her on-hire during the arrest as it only concerned West African cargo claims under the charter and related to her. However, clause 47, which put her off-hire on arrest anywhere unless occasioned by act, omission or default of the charterer or sub-charterer or their servants or agents, did bite to keep her on-hire because her detention was occasioned by the sub-charterer’s omission promptly to deal with or secure the third party’s cargo claim related to it so as to procure her release.

The Smart [2021] EWHC 1157 (Comm)

A successful outcome supported by North: there is no implied term in a charterparty or a bill of lading restricting the right of an owner to direct that freight payable under an owner’s bill of lading should be paid directly to the owner, subject to the obligation to account for any surplus to the charterer.

Find out more: New court judgment about intercepting freight

The Nounou [2021] EWCA Civ 718

Where a printed term in a standard form document incorporated into a main contract does not merely qualify or supplement a term in the main contract, but rather deprives it of all practical effect and makes the contractual scheme fundamentally different. The two provisions cannot fairly and sensibly be read together, so are in conflict and the main contract term prevails.

The Maria [2021] EWHC 2565 (Comm)

The date of final discharge of the cargo should be determined, for the purposes of the 30 calendar days’ period after discharge for notification of demurrage claims under clause 15(3) of the Shellvoy 6 form, using local time at the place of discharge.

Find out more: Claims Time Bars: Beware the time zone trap

The CMA CGM Libra [2021] UKSC 51

A vessel is unseaworthy if the passage plan carried is defective due to the owner or the master not having exercised due diligence by using reasonable skill and care to prepare it before and at the beginning of the voyage.

Find out more:  CMA CGM LIBRA: UK Supreme Court upholds unseaworthy judgment following errors in passage planning

The Eternal Bliss [2021] EWCA Civ 1712

Demurrage is the exclusive remedy for charterers’ failure to discharge the cargo within the laytime agreed absent a separate breach of the charterparty.

Read more: Court of appeal reverses judgment on shipowners entitlement to damages on top of demurrage

The Polar [2021] EWCA Civ 1828

Bills of lading incorporating a voyage charterparty do not exclude liability on the part of the bill of lading holders to contribution in general average despite the charterer not having to contribute on the basis that the event resulted from a peril insured against for which the charterer had paid the insurance premia for the benefit of the shipowner.

The Stema Barge II [2021] EWCA Civ 1880

Where the employees of a company solely monitored the weather and operated the machinery of a barge, which dragged its anchor in a storm and thereby caused damage, the company was not entitled to limit its liability as the “operator” of the ship under article 1(2) of the Limitation Convention 1976. This was because the provision of employees did not involve an element of management or control of the barge and was not an act by someone for whom the shipowner is responsible.