Polaris Shipping Co Ltd v Sinoriches Enterprises Co Ltd (the “Ocean Virgo”) [2015] EWHC 3405 (Comm)

28 Дек

В настоящей публикации рассматривается конкретный спор, разрешенный английским судом. Суть спора – это требование демереджа за неудовлетворительную скорость и другие эксплуатационные характеристики. Спор был первоначально рассмотрен в арбитраже, причем арбитр правильно разрешил вопросы факта, но допустил ошибку в вопросе права. Существо этой ошибки заключалось в том, что арбитр игнорировал периоды хорошей погоды только потому, что их длительность не достигала 24 часов кряду. Тайм-чартер проформы NYPE предусматривает гарантии на соотношение скорости судна к потребленной энергии, когда рейс проходит в условиях преобладания хорошей погоды. Таким образом, выделение (разделение чартера на 24-х часовые периоды) 24-х часового периода хорошей погоды вовсе не нужно, а нужно только чтобы периоды, когда погодные условия хорошие были достаточно представительными при выборке их в течение рейса.

Speed and Performance warranty – incorrect to divide periods of good weather into days of 24 hours.

The Facts

The vessel was let on the NYPE form for a time charter trip via the North Pacific Region to the Singapore/ Japan range carrying coal in bulk.

The vessel performed a ballast voyage and a laden voyage. The ballast voyage was from Chang Jiang Kou to Roberts Bank, British Columbia. The laden voyage was from Roberts Bank to Donghae.

A portion of the speed and consumption warranty read as follows ”… good weather/ smooth sea up to max BF SC 4/Douglas sea state 3, no adverse currents, no negative influence of swell.”

The Charterers claimed damages, alleging that the vessel was unable to meet the speed and performance warranties.

Findings

The Arbitrator, Captain Paines, found that when assessing the vessel’s performance during the required good weather, only full days of 24 hours running from noon to noon could be taken into account. For this reason, he left out of reckoning periods of good weather recorded over periods of 14 hours and 16 hours.

The Arbitrator made a finding that breach of the warranties could only be found if there were samples of good weather sufficiently large to be representative of the voyage in its entirety.

On appeal, Teare J, accepted that the Arbitrator was entitled to lay down the requirement of a sufficient sample, this being an enquiry of fact, but that he was wrong in law to ignore periods of good weather simply because they were not of 24 hours continuous duration.

He remitted the award to the Arbitrator to determine the question untrammelled by the requirement of whole days. He also directed that if the samples analyzed were sufficiently representative, that the values determined were to be applied to the whole voyage, including periods of bad weather but excluding periods of slow steaming on specific instructions.

Commentary

Usually speed and performance warranties under the NYPE form are applied only at the commencement of the Charter.

The full wording of this clause, not reproduced in the judgment, must have indicated that the warranties would apply throughout the Charter.

The sufficiently representative finding is probably also wrong, but this could only be judged if the terms of the charter were known. In the trip time charter context, it would mean that the speed and consumption warranty could only apply in voyages characterized by predominantly good weather.

Источник: http://charterpartycases.com/case/504-polaris-shipping-co-ltd-v-sinoriches-enterprises-co-ltd-the-ocean-virgo-2015-ewhc-3405-comm