Songa Chemicals AS v Navig8 Chemicals Pool Ltd (Rev 1)

Songa Chemicals AS v Navig8 Chemicals Pool Ltd (Rev 1)

On the facts, Ruchi took delivery from the vessel as Aavanti’s nominated receiver and was acting for Aavanti within the meaning of the Navig8 and Glencore LOIs. The indemnity obligations under those LOIs were triggered. Clause 38 of the voyage charter did not bar Navig8’s claim under the Glencore LOIs.

Parties
Claimant (case No. 627): Songa Chemicals AS; Defendant (case No. 627) / Claimant (case No. 637): Navig8 Chemicals Pool Inc; Defendant (case No. 637): Glencore Agriculture BV
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Summary Judgment Applications / Judgment on Summary Judgment Applications
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for Songa and Navig8. Declaratory relief to be settled. Indemnity obligations under LOIs engaged.
Legal Topics
Letters of Indemnity (loi), Misdelivery of Cargo, Indemnity Obligations, Bills of Lading, Charterparty Interpretation
Commercial Law Shipping Law Contract Law Letters of Indemnity (loi) Misdelivery of Cargo Indemnity Obligations Bills of Lading Charterparty Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Songa Chemicals AS

Claimant (case No. 627)

Navig8 Chemicals Pool Inc

Defendant (case No. 627) / Claimant (case No. 637)

Glencore Agriculture BV

Defendant (case No. 637)

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Summary Judgment Applications / Judgment on Summary Judgment Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether delivery to Ruchi was delivery to Aavanti under the LOIs
  2. 2 Whether Songa/Navig8 believed Ruchi was acting for Aavanti
  3. 3 Whether delivery was deemed correct under LOI clause 4

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts, Ruchi took delivery from the vessel as Aavanti’s nominated receiver and was acting for Aavanti within the meaning of the Navig8 and Glencore LOIs. The indemnity obligations under those LOIs were triggered. Clause 38 of the voyage charter did not bar Navig8’s claim under the Glencore LOIs.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for Songa and Navig8. Declaratory relief to be settled. Indemnity obligations under LOIs engaged.

Orders

  • Declaration that indemnity obligations under Navig8 and Glencore LOIs are engaged by delivery to Ruchi.
  • Directions for parties to resolve practicalities of defending SocGen’s claim, with liberty to apply for further relief or directions.