Case Examples
Because our experience is very wide and includes periods spent in P&I Club management, we have set out specific examples of the experience we have as solicitors in private practice. Although this gives a good indication of the types of case in which we accept instructions, it is not definitive. Even if a matter is within the scope of our expertise, it is our policy to decline instructions if we believe the client's interests might be better served by using someone else. Conversely, we accept instructions for some types of case which though not listed below, are in ancillary or closely related fields.
There follows examples of the types of case in which we have acted as solicitors:
1. We advised ship-owners in the negotiation of a shipbuilding contract with a Japanese yard for the construction of three 'Panamax' vessels.
2. We advised ship-owners in their re-negotiation of three shipbuilding contracts with a shipyard following a change in the market.
3. We acted for ship-owners in claims against a shipyard arising out of defective repair work.
4. We represented buyers of a ship who learned of the seller's intention to remove equipment from the ship prior to delivery. We advised buyers of the practical steps to be taken to force the seller to perform the MOA and deliver the ship with the equipment still on board.
5. We represented sellers of a ship that experienced mechanical problems prior to delivery. We negotiated an agreement at closing that prevented the buyers from pursuing any claim.
6. We acted for ship-owners in the pursuit of a claim against a steel company arising out of the buyer's failure to perform a contract to scrap a ship.
7. We advised ship-owners defending off hire and cargo claims following structural damage to a ship during adverse weather conditions.
8. We advised ship-owners and their P&I insurers as to changes required to the terms of the ship-owners' bills of lading in the light of recent legislation.
9. We acted for ship-owners and their P&I insurers in the defence of cargo claims arising out of alleged unseaworthiness.
10. We acted for ship-owners in the defence of claims brought by charterers following ship-owners' refusal to load a cargo that was not in compliance with the charterparty description.
11. We represented the owner of the tug 'TIGR' in the 'BOS 400' litigation (reported in the 1997 and 1998 Lloyds Law Reports), a jurisdiction battle between South Africa and England. The claim against the tug owner was for US$50 million. We were successful in obtaining an English Decree of Limitation to limit any liability to approx. US$500,000.
12. We acted for ship-owners defending a speed claim arising out of a mechanical breakdown of a ship.
13. We acted for ship-owners defending a speed claim arising out of a dispute as to the correct interpretation of a charterparty clause.
14. We acted for ship-owners and their hull underwriters in the pursuit of claims against a bunker supplier to recover the cost of mechanical damage caused by defective bunkers.
15. We acted for ship-owners in the pursuit of claims against a fraudulent ship manager.
16. We advised a ship-owner defending an action brought by a lender to enforce a personal guarantee.
17. We acted for ship-owners in the pursuit of freight and demurrage claims against a charterer.
18. We advised ship-owners in their exercise of a lien to recover freight.
19. We acted for ship-owners in the pursuit of freight and demurrage claims in London arbitration.
20. We acted for charterers of a ship carrying grain found to be wet damaged upon discharge at a Middle Eastern port. We acted for charterers in their defence of London arbitration brought by sub-charterers and in London arbitration proceedings seeking an indemnity from disponent owners.
21. We acted for charterers in pursuit of claims in London arbitration arising out of the Master's refusal to load a full and complete cargo and refusal to follow charterer's detailed stowage plan.
22. We acted for charterers in London arbitration arising out of the issue of bills of lading showing a destination different from that specified in the charterparty.
23. We advised charterers as to the operation of force majeure provisions in a charterparty following extreme weather conditions in India.
24. We acted for ship-owners in the re-negotiation of facilities with lenders following a default.
25. We acted for shippers in the pursuit of demurrage claims against a receiver.
26. We advised a bank in relation to its trade finance documentation.
27. We acted for a lender in the enforcement of mortgage security following the ship-owners default.
28. We acted for the liquidator of a shipyard in negotiations with buyers of uncompleted ships.
29. We acted for buyers of ferries in their negotiations with the seller, the liquidator of an insolvent ferry operator.
30. We acted for oil traders in the recovery of sums due under an oil sale contract.
31. We acted for an oil company in the negotiation of a joint venture for the supply of oil to a state enterprise.
32. We acted for oil traders in the defence of quality claims brought by a refinery in relation to crude oil that became contaminated during an ocean voyage.
33. We acted for oil traders unable to perform a sale contract as a result of the imposition of UN sanctions.
34. We provided expert evidence for use in the North American Courts in a challenge to jurisdiction.
35. We obtained a High Court injunction for a client to prevent a breach of a consultancy agreement concerning the construction of ten new ships.
36. We advised a venture capital fund in the structuring of a joint venture with a former Soviet Union shipping fleet.
37. We advised foreign lawyers on the ship-owners' rights and obligations following a wrongful issue by a charterer of more than one set of bills of lading for the same cargo.
38. We advised foreign lawyers on the rights and obligations of a bank that had negotiated fraudulent bills of lading issued in respect of a cargo never actually loaded.
39. We advised ship-owners on their corporate structures and arranged the incorporation of single purpose companies in a variety of countries.
40. We acted for receivers of cargo on board a ship when the voyage was abandoned and the ship-owners disappeared following arrest of the ship by the mortgagee bank.
41. We advised ship-owners on the meaning and effect of the Gencon Ice clause.
42. We advised ship-owners of their rights and obligations under an Asbatankvoy charterparty when they had to decline to load a cargo that had been mis-described by charterers in negotiations and could not be carried in the ship without risk of contamination.