Eitzen Bulk A/S v TTMI Sarl
The words 'price actually paid' in clause 15 of the SHELLTIME 4 form mean the price paid when the bunkers were stemmed, as supported by paid invoices to the bunker suppliers, assessed on a first-in-first-out basis. The clause does not provide for reimbursement of the price paid by the party seeking payment, nor does estoppel arise on the facts.
- Parties
- Claimant: Eitzen Bulk A/S; Defendant: TTMI SARL
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 14 February 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Arbitration Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under S.69 Arbitration Act 1996
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; Award upheld
- Legal Topics
- Charterparty Interpretation, Bunker Price Calculation, Estoppel, Contract Construction
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Eitzen Bulk A/S
Claimant
TTMI SARL
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Arbitration Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under S.69 Arbitration Act 1996
Legal Issues
- 1 Proper construction of 'price actually paid' in clause 15 of SHELLTIME 4 form
- 2 Whether clause 15 provides for reimbursement or price paid when bunkers were stemmed
- 3 Whether estoppel applies to prevent TTMI from disputing Eitzen's construction
Ratio Decidendi
The words 'price actually paid' in clause 15 of the SHELLTIME 4 form mean the price paid when the bunkers were stemmed, as supported by paid invoices to the bunker suppliers, assessed on a first-in-first-out basis. The clause does not provide for reimbursement of the price paid by the party seeking payment, nor does estoppel arise on the facts.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; Award upheld
Orders
- Appeal by Eitzen dismissed
- Award of the Tribunal upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment