PMAX QUEEN SHIPPING LIMITED & Anor v OLAM AGRICOLA LTDA & Ors

PMAX QUEEN SHIPPING LIMITED & Anor v OLAM AGRICOLA LTDA & Ors

Permission granted for certain amendments to the Reply that do not prejudice defendants; permission refused for late introduction of hypothetical costs for ballasting the vessel. The correct approach to contributory value is to deduct reasonable repair costs from sound market value, not to use hypothetical sale price or MoA price unless justified by evidence.

Parties
Claimant: PMAX QUEEN SHIPPING LIMITED; Claimant: EARTH MARITIME SA; Defendant: OLAM AGRICOLA LTDA; Defendant: AXA CORPORATE SOLUTIONS ASSURANCE; Defendant: AMLIN INSURANCE SE; Defendant: BALOISE BELGIUM SA; Defendant: ALLIANZ ESA CARGO & LOGISTICS GMBH; Defendant: AXA BELGIUM SA/NV; Defendant: GENERALI SCHADEVERZ MIJ. N. V.; Defendant: SWISS RE INTERNATIONAL SE; Defendant: TSM COMPAGNIE D’ASSURANCES VG; Defendant: AXA VERSICHERUNGAG; Defendant: HAMILTON MANAGING AGENCY LIMITED (on its own behalf and on behalf of the Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 4000 for the 2017 underwriting year)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Preliminary Issues Trial Ruling
Outcome
partial permission for amendments; refusal for late hypothetical cost amendment
Legal Topics
General Average, Contributory Value, Pleadings Amendment, Valuation of Damaged Vessel
Maritime Law Insurance Law General Average Contributory Value Pleadings Amendment Valuation of Damaged Vessel

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

Parties

PMAX QUEEN SHIPPING LIMITED

Claimant

EARTH MARITIME SA

Claimant

OLAM AGRICOLA LTDA

Defendant

AXA CORPORATE SOLUTIONS ASSURANCE

Defendant

AMLIN INSURANCE SE

Defendant

BALOISE BELGIUM SA

Defendant

ALLIANZ ESA CARGO & LOGISTICS GMBH

Defendant

AXA BELGIUM SA/NV

Defendant

GENERALI SCHADEVERZ MIJ. N. V.

Defendant

SWISS RE INTERNATIONAL SE

Defendant

TSM COMPAGNIE D’ASSURANCES VG

Defendant

AXA VERSICHERUNGAG

Defendant

HAMILTON MANAGING AGENCY LIMITED (on its own behalf and on behalf of the Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 4000 for the 2017 underwriting year)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Preliminary Issues Trial Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 correct basis for assessing contributory value of vessel
  2. 2 whether amendments to pleadings should be allowed
  3. 3 appropriate valuation method for damaged vessel

Ratio Decidendi

Permission granted for certain amendments to the Reply that do not prejudice defendants; permission refused for late introduction of hypothetical costs for ballasting the vessel. The correct approach to contributory value is to deduct reasonable repair costs from sound market value, not to use hypothetical sale price or MoA price unless justified by evidence.

Court Disposition

partial permission for amendments; refusal for late hypothetical cost amendment

Orders

  • Permission granted for amendments to paragraphs 34(a)(iv) and 34(c)(iii) of the Reply.
  • Permission refused for amendment to paragraph 34(c)(v) regarding ballasting costs.