RHINE SHIPPING DMCC V VITOL SA

[2023] EWHC 1265 (Comm), King's Bench Division, Commercial Court, Simon Birt KC, sitting as a High Court Deputy Judge, 26 May 2023

Charterparty (voyage) – Counterclaim – Definitions in contracts – Meaning of disponent owner – Loss of chance – Effect of internal hedging arrangements – Meaning of indemnity – Remoteness

The claimant was the disponent owner and the defendant the charterer under a voyage charter for the crude tanker Dijilah. The charterparty contained a warranty to the effect that "the vessel, owners, managers and disponent owners" were free of legal issues affecting the performance of the charter. Clause 13 provided for indemnification by the owner "for any damages, penalties, costs and consequences" in the event of arrest. Before arriving at Djeno, the loadport in Congo, the vessel was detained in Ghana as a result of the arrest by a Ghanaian court of property on board. That arrest was by way of security for a claim subject to London arbitration in a dispute between Ghanaian parties and A. A was a party connected to Rhine although there was not much evidence in this litigation as to the precise relationship. There was some common personnel and some common use of correspondence addresses. It was the bareboat charterer of the vessel and was Rhine's disponent owner under its time charter. A demurrage claim between Rhine and Vitol had been agreed, and the dispute now concerned the defendant's counterclaim for breach of the charter for delay in arriving at the loadport, Djeno in Congo. This delay arose out of the arrest of property on board the vessel by third parties at the previous port in Ghana, which defendants argued was the claimant's responsibility under the warranty and clause 13. The loss claimed was the increased price of the cargo loaded at the loadport. Rhine denied liability.