Southern African Legal Information Institute (SAFLII)’s Post

Interesting article about the importance of Charterparty terms of shipowners' responsibilities when discharging #cargo without production of the Bills (under an LOI), and the law on undisclosed principals. Article written by the Maritime Law Association of Australia and New Zealand (MLAANZ) examining Yangtze Navigation (Asia) Co Ltd & anor v TPT Shipping Ltd & ors (Xing Zhi Hai) [2024] EWHC 2371 (Comm), originally examined by Hill Dickinson LLP here > https://lnkd.in/dVdTQzJx #maritime #law #trade

What constitutes a maritime contract? In an article for Texas Lawyer, Keith Letourneau examines the criteria for assessing whether a contract is maritime and its significance. #maritimecontract #maritime #maritimelaw

Claims for vessel repair costs, dock charges, and associated expenses leading to the right of arrest of the vessel are governed by international conventions, including the 1952 Brussels Convention and the 1999 Geneva Convention, as well as national laws. Particularly, these claims are recognized in Vietnam's 2015 Maritime Law. At ANHISA, we recently provided legal assistance to a repairer in a case where the contracting party defaulted, and the vessel owner threatened legal action. Our team facilitated a negotiation that enabled the repairer to recover part of the costs while ensuring the vessel owner could retrieve their vessel. 🔗 Read more to see how our expertise can support you in navigating ship arrest and repair claims effectively. https://lnkd.in/gjw6AS_3 #ANHISA #shipping #law #ship #legaladvice #legalservice #maritimelaw #PandIclubs #settlements #shippingindustry #shippinglaw #maritimedisputes #vietnameseshipping #vietnameselaw #vietnamlegal #vietnamlaw

Claims for vessel repair costs, dock charges, and associated expenses leading to right of arrest of the vessel are governed by international conventions, including the 1952 Brussels Convention and the 1999 Geneva Convention, as well as national laws. Particularly, these claims are recognized in Vietnam's 2015 Maritime Law. At ANHISA, we recently provided legal assistance to a repairer in a case where the contracting party defaulted, and the vessel owner threatened legal action. Our team facilitated a negotiation that enabled the repairer to recover part of the costs while ensuring the vessel owner could retrieve their vessel. 🔗 Read more to see how our expertise can support you in navigating ship arrest and repair claims effectively. https://lnkd.in/gjw6AS_3 #ANHISA #shipping #law #ship #legaladvice #legalservice #maritimelaw #P&Iclubs #settlements #shippingindustry #shippinglaw #maritimedisputes #vietnameseshipping #vietnameselaw #vietnamlegal #vietnamlaw

In this insightful session, Pr. Norman Martinez, Director of the International Maritime Law Institute (IMLI), delves into the complexities and significance of limited liability in maritime law. Delivered during the 2nd Edition of the International Conference on Maritime Economy, themed Navigating Towards the Future, this talk addresses the evolving role of limited liability in the maritime industry and its implications for global shipping, trade, and legal frameworks. Pr. Martinez explores how limited liability serves as a cornerstone of maritime commerce, protecting shipowners and operators while balancing the need for legal accountability in the event of accidents or damages. He also examines how modern challenges, including emerging technologies, environmental concerns, and international regulations, may reshape the future of maritime law. This lecture offers valuable insights for maritime professionals, legal experts, and anyone interested in the intersection of law and maritime economics as the industry navigates towards a rapidly changing future. #MaritimeLaw #LimitedLiability #MaritimeEconomy #IMLI #ShippingIndustry #MaritimeConference #NavigatingTheFuture #MaritimeLegalFramework #InternationalTrade #LegalInsights #ShippingLaw #MaritimePolicy #FutureOfMaritime #MaritimeRegulations #GlobalShipping https://lnkd.in/gNNx7zBz Jan Hoffmann Ahmed Tibaoui Eleonora Modde Abdallah S. Yoss Leclerc Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou Simeon Pandelides

TDM Law Journal Special Issue on #Maritime #Law #Arbitration: Procedural and Substantive Issues - free excerpt https://lnkd.in/gCPkA58

Owners’ Lien Rights, Deteriorating Security, and the Court’s Power of Sale Lord Marine Co SA -v- Vimeksim SRB DOO (Lord Hassan) [2024] EWHC 3305 (Comm) The recent Commercial Court decision in Lord Marine Co SA -v- Vimeksim SRB DOO addresses the court’s powers to order the sale of goods to preserve assets under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996. This case involved shipowners applying for the sale of perishable cargo liened to secure claims for unpaid freight. The cargo was rapidly deteriorating, posing a significant risk to its value as security. The court granted the application, describing it as a paradigm case for such an order. Key Highlights: 1) Background: The MV Lord Hassan carried 11,000 metric tonnes of corn under a voyage charterparty. The shipowners exercised a lien over the cargo due to unpaid freight, successfully recognized by a local Turkish court. 2) Application for Sale: Concerns about cargo deterioration led the owners to seek an urgent order for sale under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996. 3) Court’s Decision: Referencing the precedent in The Moscow Stars [2017], the court found the cargo to be perishable and at imminent risk of losing value. The sale was deemed necessary to preserve the asset's worth and uphold the lien’s security. Notable Points: - The court confirmed its powers to order the sale of liened goods, even when owned by third parties, as long as the lien is valid under the governing contracts. - It emphasised the importance of preserving security in lien cases, noting that failure to act could render the lien worthless. - The decision provides further clarity on the interaction between contractual lien rights, perishable goods, and the court’s role in supporting arbitral proceedings. #MaritimeLaw #CommercialCourt #ArbitrationAct1996 #FreightClaims #LienRights #CargoSecurity #MaritimeDisputes #PerishableGoods #LegalInsights #MaritimeArbitration #ShippingLaw #ULA #UnitedLossAdjusters

This matter was one of the last matters that I assisted Boaz Chan with at Incisive in 2022. Upon rejoining Incisive earlier this year, I was more than happy to continue working on the file as the matter proceeded to the Court of Appeal. From a maritime law perspective, there has long been a question of whether a jurisdiction who is a signatory to the LLMC will recognise a limitation fund set up in a non-LLMC jurisdiction. After all, it is reasonable for one to second guess the extra-territorial effect of limitation funds constituted within non-LLMC signatories since such funds are constituted pursuant to domestic legislation and not through international conventions. This case was such a case where our client had constituted a limitation fund in China, owing to a collision within Chinese waters. Liability proceedings were afoot in China. Upon application, the High Court held that proceedings in Singapore should be stayed in favour of Chinese Court proceedings on grounds of forum non conveniens and that security provided to release the vessel in Singapore should be returned / cancelled. The issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the the claimant was entitled to retain security after the Court had ordered that proceedings be stayed on grounds of forum non conveniens. The Court held that security ought not be retained in such cases. For those who are interested in the topic, I strongly urge you to read the High Court judgment in conjunction with the Court of Appeal judgment. Both judgments, when read together, appear to suggest that Singapore (being a signatory to the LLMC) will recognise limitation funds constituted in non-LLMC jurisdictions. This is because in forcing a shipowner to set up a limitation fund in Singapore would be contrary to a shipowner's right to claim limitation in its choice of forum: see Evergreen International SA v Volkswagen Group Singapore Pte Ltd and others [2004] 2 SLR(R) 457. This begs the questions - If this represents the correct position at law (i.e. that Singapore should not disturb a shipowner's right to claim limitation in its choice of forum), what then is the point of being a signatory to the LLMC if domestic legislation can still have extra-territorial effect and will ultimately be respected by other jurisdiction? That is a question I will think about during my next holiday. In the meantime, it is time to get back to work.

ANK Law Office successfully defended the interests of a leading shipping company in a lengthy litigation. As a result of the litigation lasting over four years, a Ukrainian court ruled in favor of a foreign shipowner, dismissing a claim filed by a seafarer who worked aboard one of the vessels as a crew member. The seafarer demanded compensation of $136 410, alleging unfitness for work at sea. During the proceedings, multiple expert reports were obtained, and several medical examinations were conducted. Combined with other evidence presented in the case, these findings allowed the court to conclude that the shipowner was not at fault for the plaintiff’s unfitness for work at sea. Additionally, the court ordered the seafarer to reimburse the shipowner for legal expenses incurred during the litigation, amounting to over €10 000. Details of the case and court decisions are available via the following links: https://lnkd.in/gujkXMXG, https://lnkd.in/gFDPe_c5. The ANK`s team in this case was represented by maritime law attorneys Artem Volkov and Kostiantyn Moriakov, under the general supervision of Managing Partner and attorney Oleksandr Kifak.

Ship Arrest Under Maritime Law: Reasons, Procedure, and Precautions Check out this article 👉 https://lnkd.in/d--9e8MS #ShipArrest #MaritimeLaw #shipping #shippingindustry #maritimeindustry #maritime #maritimesafety #MarineInsight #Merchantnavy #Merchantmarine #MerchantnavyShips