Linea Naviera Paramaconi SA v Abnormal Load Engineering Ltd [2001] EWHC 534 (Comm) (23 February 2001)

Linea Naviera Paramaconi SA v Abnormal Load Engineering Ltd [2001] EWHC 534 (Comm) (23 February 2001)

The counterclaim relates to loss (idle time of equipment and personnel) sufficiently closely associated with the loading of the goods (cranes) under the contract of carriage, and is therefore subject to the one-year time bar in Article III Rule 6 of the Hague Rules. No effective contractual extension of the time limit was granted for this claim.

Citation
[2001] EWHC 534 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Linea Naviera Paramaconi S. A.; Defendant: Abnormal Load Engineering Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Preliminary Issue / Preliminary Issue on Time Bar of Counterclaim
Outcome
Counterclaim is time barred
Legal Topics
Time Bar Under Hague Rules, Seaworthiness, Counterclaim Procedure, Extension of Limitation Period
Shipping Law Contract Law Time Bar Under Hague Rules Seaworthiness Counterclaim Procedure Extension of Limitation Period

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Linea Naviera Paramaconi S. A.

Claimant

Abnormal Load Engineering Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Preliminary Issue / Preliminary Issue on Time Bar of Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's counterclaim is time barred under Article III Rule 6 of the Hague Rules
  2. 2 Whether the counterclaim sufficiently relates to the goods to fall within the time bar
  3. 3 Whether there was a contractual extension of the time limit

Ratio Decidendi

The counterclaim relates to loss (idle time of equipment and personnel) sufficiently closely associated with the loading of the goods (cranes) under the contract of carriage, and is therefore subject to the one-year time bar in Article III Rule 6 of the Hague Rules. No effective contractual extension of the time limit was granted for this claim.

Court Disposition

Counterclaim is time barred

Orders

  • Declaration that the Part 20 claim for which conditional permission was given is time barred