MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company SA v The Owners of the Ship “Tychy” (No 2) - Court of Appeal (Lord Phillips MR and Jonathan Parker LJ and Lord Mustill) - 24 July 2001

Contract - Principles of interpretation - Extent to which extrinsic evidence may be taken into account - Whether slot charter agreement novated - Whether re-novation - Whether Court has in rem or in personam jurisdiction against defendants

This was an appeal against the judgment of David Steel J in two consolidated actions in rem. The judgment awarded the claimants (“MSC”) some $6 million by way of sums outstanding in respect of slot charter hire in relation to a number of vessels. The defendants, Polish Ocean Lines Joint Stock Company (“POL”), were formerly the State owned company, Polish Ocean Lines. The Judge held that POL were liable to MSC because POL were, at all material times, the slot charterers of the vessels. POL challenged that finding in the Court of Appeal. They contended that the slot charterers were their subsidiary company, POL Atlantic (“POL-A”). They said that that was the only issue raised by the appeal. They contended that if they were correct, there was no foundation for asserting jurisdiction in rem against POL, and the proceedings had to be set aside. MSC did not accept that that was the position. They submitted that POL had submitted to the in personam jurisdiction of the court and that even if their claim did not found Admiralty jurisdiction in rem, or even fall within the in personam jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court, they had a valid claim against POL for the sums awarded by the Judge.