SK Shipping Europe Limited v Capital VLCC 3 Corp

SK Shipping Europe Limited v Capital VLCC 3 Corp

The appeal was dismissed because the misrepresentations found did not induce the charterparty, the charterer affirmed the contract by ordering a substantial voyage, and the court's discretion under section 2(2) Misrepresentation Act 1967 was not wrongly exercised. The guarantee extended to costs orders. No error of law or fact justified interfering with the trial judge's findings.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: SK Shipping Europe Limited; Appellant/defendant: Capital VLCC 3 Corp; Appellant/defendant: Capital Maritime and Trading Corp
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Charterparty, Affirmation, Damages, Guarantee, Rescission
Contract Law Commercial Law Maritime Law Misrepresentation Charterparty Affirmation Damages Guarantee +1 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SK Shipping Europe Limited

Respondent/claimant

Capital VLCC 3 Corp

Appellant/defendant

Capital Maritime and Trading Corp

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pre-contractual representations induced the charterparty
  2. 2 Whether the charterer affirmed the contract
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise discretion under section 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 to declare the contract subsisting and award damages in lieu of rescission

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the misrepresentations found did not induce the charterparty, the charterer affirmed the contract by ordering a substantial voyage, and the court's discretion under section 2(2) Misrepresentation Act 1967 was not wrongly exercised. The guarantee extended to costs orders. No error of law or fact justified interfering with the trial judge's findings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; judgment of the High Court affirmed.