Dalwood Marine Co v Nordana Line A/S [2009] EWHC 3394 (Comm) (21 December 2009)

Dalwood Marine Co v Nordana Line A/S [2009] EWHC 3394 (Comm) (21 December 2009)

The tribunal did not err in law by taking into account the benefit to the Owners of being able to earn under the Navimed charter earlier than would otherwise have been possible, as this benefit was a direct result of mitigation following the Charterers' breach. The law permits such benefits to be considered if clearly established, even if they accrue after the notional redelivery date. The tribunal's factual findings on the existence and value of the benefit are not open to challenge on appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 3394 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant Owners: Dalwood Marine Co.; Respondent Charterers: Nordana Line A/S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Arbitration Act 1996, S.69 / Judgment on Appeal From Arbitral Award
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Damages for Wrongful Termination of Charterparty, Mitigation of Loss, Assessment of Damages, Charterparty Disputes
Commercial Law Maritime Law Arbitration Damages for Wrongful Termination of Charterparty Mitigation of Loss Assessment of Damages Charterparty Disputes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dalwood Marine Co.

Claimant Owners

Nordana Line A/S

Respondent Charterers

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Arbitration Act 1996, S.69 / Judgment on Appeal From Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal erred in law by taking into account actual and notional earnings of the vessel after the notional redelivery date when assessing damages for wrongful termination of a charterparty

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal did not err in law by taking into account the benefit to the Owners of being able to earn under the Navimed charter earlier than would otherwise have been possible, as this benefit was a direct result of mitigation following the Charterers' breach. The law permits such benefits to be considered if clearly established, even if they accrue after the notional redelivery date. The tribunal's factual findings on the existence and value of the benefit are not open to challenge on appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The arbitral award in favour of the Charterers stands
  • No error of law found in the tribunal's approach to damages