charterparties: termination, time and damages by david mcinnes, partner
DESCRIPTION
CHARTERPARTIES: TERMINATION, TIME AND DAMAGES By David McInnes, Partner. Areas of dispute. Whether a party has the right to terminate. If they do have the right to terminate how long does that right last? What damages can the innocent party recover?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Areas of dispute
1.Whether a party has the right to terminate.
2.If they do have the right to terminate how long does that right last?
3.What damages can the innocent party recover?
Whether a party has the right to terminate
EXAMPLE: A Charterer is failing to pay hire on time, or alternatively, not at all.
•Breach of condition: the easier claim if the clause is a condition.
•A party can terminate a contract and claim damages under English law if a condition of the contract has been breached.
•A condition is a term that is said to go to “the root” of the contract.
•Until recently the widely held view was that failure to pay hire under a Charterparty did not constitute a breach of condition.
3
Whether a party has the right to terminate
•Kuwait Rocks Co v AMN Bulcarriers (the “Astra”) [2013] EWHC 865 (Comm)
•Balance tipped in Owners’ favour?
•Clause 5 of NYPE held to be a condition on the facts of the case (where Owners had to comply with and did comply with an anti-technicality clause) but also referred to by the Judge as obiter as applying even without an anti-technicality clause.
4
Whether a party has the right to terminate
• Breach of innominate term: the more difficult but still possible claim.
• Will depend on the nature of the facts and of the breach.
• The failure to pay a single hire payment on time is not generally considered enough to be repudiatory.
• Where, however, the conduct of the Charterers is such that it is reasonable to infer unwillingness or inability on their part to pay there may well be repudiation. However, this requires a more consistent failure.
5
Whether a party has the right to terminate
What is a more ‘consistent failure’ depends on the facts of the case. Recent examples:
•LMLN London Arbitration 7/14
•LMLN London Arbitration 16/14
•Januzaj v Valilas [2014] EWCA Civ 436
6
How long does that right last?
• The Owner has a ‘reasonable time’ to decide.
• Fact dependant.
• White Rosebay Shipping SA v Hong Kong Chain Glory Shipping Limited (The Fortune Plum) [2013] EWHC 1355 (Comm).
8
A word on damages
•Issues can arise but generally:
• Claims are usually based on the difference between the charter rate of hire and the market rate for the unexpired portion of the charter, assuming that there was a market. (used recently in LMLN 7/14)
• Consider also the losses that flow ‘forseeably’ from the breach. (considered recently in LMLN 16/14)
9