Windrush Intercontinental SA and Another v UACC Bergshav Tankers AS (556/2015) [2016] ZASCA 199; 2017 (3) SA 1 (SCA) (6 December 2016)

Windrush Intercontinental SA and Another v UACC Bergshav Tankers AS (556/2015) [2016] ZASCA 199; 2017 (3) SA 1 (SCA) (6 December 2016)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the hostages' employment contracts had terminated by effluxion of time and by supervening impossibility when the vessel was released and the hostages remained in captivity. The continued detention of the hostages by pirates, despite payment of ransom, constituted a supervening event that rendered further performance of the employment contracts impossible. No further obligation to pay wages or repatriation costs existed beyond 15 April 2011, and any payments made thereafter were ex gratia. As the hostages did not render any service to the vessel after this date, no maritime lien for crew wages could arise. Consequently, Bergshav could not invoke an...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 199
Parties
Appellant: Windrush Intercontinental SA; Appellant: MT "Asphalt Venture"; Respondent: UACC Bergshav Tankers AS
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 December 2016
Case Number
556/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal Local Division of the High Court, Durban (admiralty Jurisdiction)
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of the court a quo set aside and replaced.
Judges
Maya, Shongwe, Wallis, Dambuza, Makgoka
Legal Topics
Maritime Lien, Crew Wages, Frustration of Contract, Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act, Bareboat Charter, Action in Rem
Admiralty and Maritime Maritime Lien Crew Wages Frustration of Contract Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act Bareboat Charter Action in Rem

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Windrush Intercontinental SA

Appellant

MT "Asphalt Venture"

Appellant

UACC Bergshav Tankers AS

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal Local Division of the High Court, Durban (admiralty Jurisdiction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a maritime lien for crew wages existed at the time of the vessel's arrest, entitling Bergshav to arrest the Asphalt Venture by way of an action in rem under s 3(4)(a) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act.
  2. 2 Whether the hostages' employment contracts were terminated by frustration or supervening impossibility, thereby extinguishing any claim for unpaid wages.
  3. 3 Whether any maritime lien for crew wages could be assigned to Bergshav and enforced against the vessel.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the hostages' employment contracts had terminated by effluxion of time and by supervening impossibility when the vessel was released and the hostages remained in captivity. The continued detention of the hostages by pirates, despite payment of ransom, constituted a supervening event that rendered further performance of the employment contracts impossible. No further obligation to pay wages or repatriation costs existed beyond 15 April 2011, and any payments made thereafter were ex gratia. As the hostages did not render any service to the vessel after this date, no maritime lien for crew wages could arise. Consequently, Bergshav could not invoke an...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of the court a quo set aside and replaced.

Orders

  • The deemed arrest of the MT "Asphalt Venture" is hereby set aside.
  • The security furnished on behalf of Windrush Intercontinental SA shall be released to it forthwith.