Trafigura Maritime Logistics PTE Ltd v Clearlake Shipping PTE Ltd [2022] EWHC 2234 (Comm) (03 October 2022)

Trafigura Maritime Logistics PTE Ltd v Clearlake Shipping PTE Ltd [2022] EWHC 2234 (Comm) (03 October 2022)

Clause 33(6) of the charterparties, as construed in the commercial context and despite defective drafting, required a deemed indemnity to be given by charterers to owners whenever discharge without presentation of original bills of lading was requested. The failure to provide the P&I Club wording before 'lifting subs' did not negate the indemnity, nor was a formal signed LOI required. The indemnity was operative and recoverable losses included those flowing from the vessel's arrest and lost profits, subject to proper quantification. PBSA was not liable to CSPL due to the contractual lacuna created by the novation, as there was no privity of contract or operative indemnity chain linking...

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2234 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant (159 Claim): Trafigura Maritime Logistics Pte Ltd; Defendant (159 Claim) / Claimant (171 Claim): Clearlake Shipping Pte Ltd; Claimant (171 Claim): Clearlake Chartering USA Inc; Defendant (171 Claim): Petroleo Brasileiro SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Trial (high Court, Business and Property Courts, England and Wales) / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claims by Trafigura against CSPL succeed; claims by Clearlake parties against PBSA fail (on the Contractual Lacuna Issue).
Legal Topics
Maritime Indemnities, Voyage Charterparties, Letters of Indemnity, Misdelivery of Cargo, Interpretation of Contract Clauses, Novation, Damages for Loss of Profit, Arrest and Release of Vessel
Commercial Law Shipping Law Contract Law Maritime Indemnities Voyage Charterparties Letters of Indemnity Misdelivery of Cargo Interpretation of Contract Clauses +3 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trafigura Maritime Logistics Pte Ltd

Claimant (159 Claim)

Clearlake Shipping Pte Ltd

Defendant (159 Claim) / Claimant (171 Claim)

Clearlake Chartering USA Inc

Claimant (171 Claim)

Petroleo Brasileiro SA

Defendant (171 Claim)

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Trial (high Court, Business and Property Courts, England and Wales) / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Construction and effect of clause 33(6) in the voyage and sub-charters
  2. 2 Whether indemnity was given or required under the charterparty terms
  3. 3 Whether provision of Owners' P&I Club wording before 'lifting subs' was a condition precedent

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 33(6) of the charterparties, as construed in the commercial context and despite defective drafting, required a deemed indemnity to be given by charterers to owners whenever discharge without presentation of original bills of lading was requested. The failure to provide the P&I Club wording before 'lifting subs' did not negate the indemnity, nor was a formal signed LOI required. The indemnity was operative and recoverable losses included those flowing from the vessel's arrest and lost profits, subject to proper quantification. PBSA was not liable to CSPL due to the contractual lacuna created by the novation, as there was no privity of contract or operative indemnity chain linking...

Court Disposition

Claims by Trafigura against CSPL succeed; claims by Clearlake parties against PBSA fail (on the Contractual Lacuna Issue).

Orders

  • CSPL is liable to indemnify Trafigura for losses arising from the vessel's arrest and lost profits, subject to quantification.
  • Clearlake parties' claims against PBSA are dismissed.