Bayoil SA v Seawind Tankers Corporation [2000] EWHC 213 (Comm) (22 November 2000)

Bayoil SA v Seawind Tankers Corporation [2000] EWHC 213 (Comm) (22 November 2000)

The Speed Warranty and Clause Paramount can be reconciled; the Speed Warranty applies subject to statutory exceptions under the Hague Rules, and there is no absolute conflict between the clauses. The arbitrators were correct to find that the Owners could rely on Hague Rules exceptions as a defence.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] EWHC 213 (Comm)
Parties
Appellant: Applicant Charterers; Respondent: Respondent Owners
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration Award / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Charterparty Construction, Speed Warranty, Hague Rules Exceptions, Incorporation of Statutory Terms
Maritime Law Arbitration Charterparty Construction Speed Warranty Hague Rules Exceptions Incorporation of Statutory Terms

Source-derived case record

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant Charterers

Appellant

Respondent Owners

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration Award / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the vessel failed to perform a laden passage at 11 knots as warranted in the charterparty
  2. 2 Whether Hague Rules exceptions can constitute a defence to a claim for breach of an express warranty

Ratio Decidendi

The Speed Warranty and Clause Paramount can be reconciled; the Speed Warranty applies subject to statutory exceptions under the Hague Rules, and there is no absolute conflict between the clauses. The arbitrators were correct to find that the Owners could rely on Hague Rules exceptions as a defence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Permission to appeal refused under Section 69(8) of the Arbitration Act 1996