Could owners be liable for conversion by retaining bunkers on board the vessel after withdrawal?
In Daebo Shipping Co Ltd v The Ship GO STAR  FCAFC 156, the Federal Court of Australia considered whether, as a matter of English law, head owners could be liable to disponent owners for conversion or detinue as a result of retaining bunkers on board the vessel after lawful withdrawal from the head charter. The court also dealt with a claim for interference with disponent owners’ contractual relations, arising from various notices sent by head owners to the charterers at the end of the chain. The vessel was chartered under a string of time charters on the 1981 NYPE form in the following charterparty chain: SA – BMS – Bluefield – Daebo – Nanyuan…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Ince & Co briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Ince & Co
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Ince & Co
Damages for breach of terms as to quality — does the Sale of Goods Act limit such damages to depreciation in value?
This sale contract dispute provides a useful refresher with regard to the proper application of the provisions of sections 53 and 54 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979.
On 1 August 2014, the ‘Provisional Measures on the Collection of Tax on Non-Resident Taxpayers Engaged in International Transportation Business’ came into force.