- Transport (Including aviation and shipping) (45)
- Company/Commercial (35)
- Insurance/reinsurance (18)
- Banking / Finance (11)
- Energy (11)
- Construction (8)
- Corporate (8)
- Commodities (6)
- Crime (5)
- Employment (5)
- Regulatory and compliance (5)
- Financial services (4)
- In-House (3)
- Professional Indemnity/Negligence (3)
- Competition/EU (2)
- Funds (2)
- Information Technology (2)
- PPP/PFI/Commercial projects (2)
- Agriculture (1)
- Environment (1)
- Insolvency & restructuring (1)
- Intellectual Property (1)
- Privacy and reputation (1)
- Real Estate (1)
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
A carrier, whose containers had been detained for a long time and seemed to be unlikely to be returned, was found not to have the right to daily liquidated damages for an open-ended period.
The orthodox view is that damages are limited to losses suffered during the overrun period only. Similar issues were explored in a recent judgment from the Commercial Court in the Great Creation.
Obligation on the seller to obtain export licences and the standard-form GAFTA prohibition clause download
Public Company Rise v. Nibulon S.A.  EWHC 684 (Comm) was an appeal from a GAFTA Appeal Board that concerned the relationship between the obligation on the seller to obtain export licences and the standard-form GAFTA prohibition clause.
Where cargo is loaded into a carrier’s containers that are subsequently loaded onto the vessel it is unrealistic to treat this as anything other than a single loading process.
When a contract does not reflect the intention of the parties equitable relief can be sought from the court for the contract to be rectified. It is rarely granted, but in this case it was.
A useful reminder of the principles applied to calculate damages under English law.
An English court has upheld an anti-suit injunction preventing a party from pursuing direct rights of action against a P&I Club in Turkey.
Commercial court judge has declined to follow Flaux J’s decision in The Astra over payment of hire.
In this case the vessel owners failed to provide the charterers with all documents in support of their demurrage claim within the 90-day time period.
The Court of Appeal has confirmed the meaning of the expression “in-transit loss” in a voyage charter party in the Trafigura Beheer case.
A recent Commercial Court decision considered the position when a contract provides for the law of one jurisdiction to be applicable, but for the arbitration to take place outside that jurisdiction.
The facts of the underlying dispute in Compania Sud Americana de Vapores A v Hin-Pro International Logistics are less interesting than the Court’s findings...
December 2014 saw the first three convictions in the Sustainable Growth Group case, involving the fraudulent selling and promotion of investment products based on green biofuel.
Who pays the Suez Canal fees? download
HBC Hamburg Bulk Carriers v Huyton was an appeal from an arbitration award on a point of construction in relation to the wording of an addendum to a charterparty.
Lorand Shipping Ltd v Davof Trading (Africa) BV (Ocean Glory) is a rare example of a successful challenge to an arbitration award on the ground of serious irregularity under Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
If a vessel’s hull is fouled during a charter and there is no opportunity to clean it before delivery under the follow-on charter to the same charterer, is the owner liable for the underperformance during the second charter?
A claim brought by Mariah Re is one of few cat bonds to have been triggered, and almost as quickly went into dispute.
The recent judgment in the Longchamp case has overturned accepted industry thinking in how bunkers and crew wages are dealt with in a hijacking.
The Court of Appeal has reached its conclusions in Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd & Anor v The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime.
Mr Justice Jay’s judgment in Milton Furniture Ltd v Brit Insurance Ltd is a ringing reminder of the importance of an insured’s compliance with policy provisions relating to security.