Spar Shipping AS v Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co, Ltd

Spar Shipping AS v Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co, Ltd

GCL is bound by the guarantees as Mr Jia had actual authority, or at minimum, GCL knew and did not repudiate his authority, and in any event, Mr Jia was performing duty-related activities. Payment of hire is not a condition of the charterparties; it is an innominate term. GCS’s persistent late and non-payment of hire, and its conduct, amounted to a renunciation of the charterparties, entitling Spar to terminate and claim damages for loss of bargain. Where there was no available market for a replacement charter of the unexpired term, damages are to be assessed by reference to actual earnings, not hypothetical replacement charters. Arbitration costs reasonably incurred as a result of GCS’s...

Parties
Claimant: SPAR SHIPPING AS; Defendant: GRAND CHINA LOGISTICS HOLDING (GROUP) CO., LTD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (enforcement of Guarantees) / High Court Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed for the claimant (Spar Shipping AS) against the defendant (GCL).
Legal Topics
Guarantees, Authority of Agents, Repudiatory Breach, Damages Assessment, Time Charterparties, Arbitration Costs
Contract Law Commercial Law Shipping Law Guarantees Authority of Agents Repudiatory Breach Damages Assessment Time Charterparties +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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SPAR SHIPPING AS

Claimant

GRAND CHINA LOGISTICS HOLDING (GROUP) CO., LTD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (enforcement of Guarantees) / High Court Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is GCL bound by the guarantees signed by Mr Jia?
  2. 2 Is payment of hire a condition of the charterparties?
  3. 3 Was GCS’s conduct in relation to payment of hire a repudiation or renunciation?

Ratio Decidendi

GCL is bound by the guarantees as Mr Jia had actual authority, or at minimum, GCL knew and did not repudiate his authority, and in any event, Mr Jia was performing duty-related activities. Payment of hire is not a condition of the charterparties; it is an innominate term. GCS’s persistent late and non-payment of hire, and its conduct, amounted to a renunciation of the charterparties, entitling Spar to terminate and claim damages for loss of bargain. Where there was no available market for a replacement charter of the unexpired term, damages are to be assessed by reference to actual earnings, not hypothetical replacement charters. Arbitration costs reasonably incurred as a result of GCS’s...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed for the claimant (Spar Shipping AS) against the defendant (GCL).

Orders

  • GCL is liable under the guarantees for the sums due under the charterparties, including damages for loss of bargain and arbitration costs, subject to assessment of quantum as per the judgment.
  • Quantum to be calculated based on actual earnings and projected earnings to expiry, with adjustments as specified in the judgment.