Reference no: EM132532903

PSHI III.II Transport Law and Charter Parties Assignment - International Maritime College Oman

Students are expected to analyze below given cases on Transport Law and Charter Parties individually.

Discussions on each given case has to contain students' interpretation of related articles/clauses in   Transport Conventions and Charter Party Forms and must be reflecting  and depending on valid lawful causes.

CASE STUDY ASSIGNMENT -

Case 1. A dispute has been filed between a shipper and ship owner regarding to a maritime contract for the carriage of live animals. The transport contract was incorporated according to the Hamburg Convention.

The shipper claims that 234 cattle out of 1200 has been dead during the sea voyage due to lack of ventilation in the livestock carrier M.V Denizos operated under a T/C of Seagull Chartering Ltd. Shipper claims "234 cattle has been lost due to omission of the carrier or his servants even the shipper has given their instructions for the proper ventilation in written and these instructions has been inserted into the contract. Shippers also claims that carrier provided them an expired third party verification report to prove compliance with air flow standards and yet carrier confirmed that the latest third party ventilation verification report would be provided after sailing" shipper claims a partial compensation for their loss.

Discuss the possible outcome of shipper's claims according to the related articles in Hamburg Convention by providing proof.

Case 2. The consignee claims a total of 120,000 GBP from carriers as a compensation for the five unit motor generators which has been damaged during the sea voyage. The consignee states that they had given a notice of damage to the carrier after 14 day of the delivery day On the other hand, the carrier and their agents claims that they have never received such notice in written within that time period but only after 35 days after the delivery and they do not accept shippers' claims about the compensation of this damage. The B/L was incorporated according the Rotterdam Convention

Discuss the possible outcomes for consignee's claims in terms of basis of liability of carriers and notice of time for the loss, damage or delay.

Case 3. The shipper claims compensation for the delay of delivery of their goods due to the carriers' intended reaction of unloading the goods as soon as they realized that loaded goods were having a dangerous nature which has been listed in IMDG Code. Carriers claims that they have the right to make this discharge because shippers has not inform carriers about the nature of their goods. The maritime contract has been incorporated according to Hamburg Convention.

Discuss the court's possible decision for resolution of this dispute of contractors' claims.

Case 4. Assume that, you are the chartering manager for the company who owns the MV High Seas. You have chartered out your vessel to AA shipping for a voyage from Port of Sohar to Port of Sydney. During the loading operations in Sohar the laytime was exceeded as the cargo was not available for loading for another week and as a result the vessel entered demurrage. AA Shipping accepted the demurrage costs and agreed to pay the vessel owner on a daily basis on receipt of the demurrage invoice. The first invoice was sent to AA Shipping on Sunday 20th May. By close of business on Thursday 24th May, the vessel owner had received no payment for demurrage from AA Shipping.

Utilising the Gencon 94 document formulate a plan of action for the best interests of your company. How would you bring evidence to protect your lawful rights against the charterers.

Case 5. The charterers and vessel owners entered into a C/P Agreement for the MV Lucas. The POL was noted as Dubai Port, Terminal 2 and the POD was noted as Dublin Port, North Side Docks. The owner's broker (You) had inserted the following wording into the C/P:

" Discharging port or berth- 1/1 safe port/berth aaaa. Time lost in waiting for berth for berth to count as laytime wipon/wibon/wifpon/wccon"

During the voyage from Dubai to Dublin the vessel suffered delays due to bad weather. The parties had agreed separate laytime at POL and POD as 24/48 hrs. Upon arrival in Dublin at 10.00 am, the captain was notified by the port authority that the berth was currently occupied for the next 4-5 days and the vessel will have to wait in the anchorage area until the berth was free. On arrival to the waiting place master tendered NOR to the charterers/charterers' agent at 13:00 pm in the afternoon. At this point the charterers refused to accept commencement of laytime.

As being the owners' broker, formulate a commercially appropriate response to the charterers based on the terms and conditions under Gencon 94 to remind them your principal's (ship owner) rights according to the articles settled regarding the commencement of laytime.

Case 6. Fidelity Shipping Inc. have chartered out the M/V Golden Express to Hanzo Shipping LLC on a 6-year time charter in year 2014. Hanzo Shipping LLC operated the vessel on a route from Port of Sohar to Port of Los Angeles. POL-POD-POL takes 50 days. The vessel is due to be off-hired on the 19th July 2020 at Sohar Port.

As of 6th June 2018 the vessel is en-route from LA and is due to arrive Port of Sohar on the 12th June 2018. But Hanzo Shipping LLC is currently taking new bookings for next shipments from Port of Sohar to Port of Los Angeles upon the vessel arrival which means Hanzo Shipping will be not able to redeliver the vessel to Fidelity on the 19th July 2020.

As being the chartering manager of Fidelity Shipping, Discuss your reaction by support your answer by using NYPE 15 C/P form.

Case 7. In order to ship 220,000 metric ton of product from Dubai to Rotterdam, Lavey Metals Ltd entered into a contract with Wilde Shipping Services LLC. The contract was to be completed over 14 voyages. Lavey Metals agreed to transfer the freight payment or give a QNB bank guarantee letter for the freight payment when in receipt of the NOR from Wilde Shipping Services LLC. as per box 18 and 19 of the VOLCOA agreement.

On Sunday 29th April Wilde Shipping Services LLC tendered the NOR for the first shipment at 10:00 am and Wilde Shipping Services received a bank guarantee letter in the afternoon of same day from charterer's bank QNB. By close of business on 1nd May, Wilde Shipping Services LLC had received no payment from Lavey Metals Ltd and sent a written notification to Lavey Metals that owners will be exercising their withdrawal right for the vessel and cancel the C/P.

As the commercial manager of Lavey Metals Ltd., compose a response to Wilde Services LLC based on the standard VOLCOA agreement.