Emeraldian Ltd Partnership v Wellmix Shipping Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 1411 (Comm) (17 June 2010)

Emeraldian Ltd Partnership v Wellmix Shipping Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 1411 (Comm) (17 June 2010)

The delay in berthing VINE was caused by a partial interruption on port due to repairs, which is an excepted cause under the SCALE terms and does not require the interruption to be fortuitous or beyond the control of the Seller/Charterers. However, the Charterers breached the safe berth warranty by nominating a berth that was not prospectively safe, and the resulting delay is recoverable as damages at the demurrage rate. Laytime commenced at 0038 on 8 January 2008 upon acceptance of notice of readiness by the terminal operator. The guarantee claim against the Second Defendant fails for lack of enforceability under Chinese law.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1411 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Emeraldian Limited Partnership; First Defendant: Wellmix Shipping Limited; Second Defendant: Guangzhou Iron & Steel Corporation Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (demurrage and Guarantee) / High Court Trial, First Instance
Outcome
Claim for demurrage against First Defendant succeeds; claim against Second Defendant as guarantor fails.
Legal Topics
Demurrage, Charterparty Interpretation, Safe Berth Warranty, Laytime Exceptions, Guarantee Enforcement
Commercial Law Shipping Law Contract Law Demurrage Charterparty Interpretation Safe Berth Warranty Laytime Exceptions Guarantee Enforcement

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emeraldian Limited Partnership

Claimant

Wellmix Shipping Limited

First Defendant

Guangzhou Iron & Steel Corporation Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (demurrage and Guarantee) / High Court Trial, First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When did laytime commence under the charterparty?
  2. 2 Does delay in berthing due to repairs count as laytime or is it excepted?
  3. 3 Was there a breach of the safe berth warranty by the Charterers?

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in berthing VINE was caused by a partial interruption on port due to repairs, which is an excepted cause under the SCALE terms and does not require the interruption to be fortuitous or beyond the control of the Seller/Charterers. However, the Charterers breached the safe berth warranty by nominating a berth that was not prospectively safe, and the resulting delay is recoverable as damages at the demurrage rate. Laytime commenced at 0038 on 8 January 2008 upon acceptance of notice of readiness by the terminal operator. The guarantee claim against the Second Defendant fails for lack of enforceability under Chinese law.

Court Disposition

Claim for demurrage against First Defendant succeeds; claim against Second Defendant as guarantor fails.

Orders

  • First Defendant to pay demurrage to Claimant in the sum of US$5,000,000.
  • Claim against Second Defendant dismissed.