Lloyd's Maritime Law Newsletter

This case involved an issue as to the ownership of the vessel Lakhta, registered at St. Petersburg (formerly Leningrad). On 1 April 1992 the plaintiffs issued a writ in rem claiming that they were the sole owners of the vessel, and arrested the..

The trial judge found that the cargo had been damaged partly as a result of improper handling during discharge, and partly by insufficiency of packing. The cargo owners submitted that it was incumbent on the carrier to show what portion of the..

In December 1981 Japanese shippers consigned three containers to a carrier for carriage from Japan to Montreal and from thence to Quebec. An ocean bill of lading was issued which provided: - Received by the carrier . . . to be carried subject to..

The plaintiff assureds sought to recover the cost of removing a sunken vessel. The marine insurance policy covered removal costs if the removal was “compulsory by law”. The defendant insurers denied the claim. The district court held..

The defendants applied to stay court proceedings pending arbitration in London. The bill of lading incorporated provisions as a charterparty between non-parties to the present suit. The relevant clause read: - All terms, conditions, liberties,..

The vessel was chartered on the Gencon form. A dispute arose as to liability for a failure to discharge cargo between 16 00 on 14 April, when the vessel berthed, and 13 10 on 17 April, when the vessel commenced discharge. The shipowners contended..