Bad Stowage & Unseaworthiness Issues: UK Admiralty Court Decision

MaritimeProfessional.com/Hill Dickinson
Friday, July 26, 2013

The recent Admiralty Court decision in the Eems Solar (Yuzhny Zavoid Metall Profil -v- Eems Berheerder B. V. the 'Eems Solar' 2013) has highlighted bad stowage and un-seaworthiness issues involving a cargo of steel coils shipped from China.

Hill Dickinson acted for the successful owners and their P&I insurers in defending a claim by Russian receivers for losses resulting from damage to steel coils due to cargo movement during the voyage.

The consignment of 411 steel coils was loaded at Xingang, China for Novorossiysk, Russia aboard the 'Eems Solar', a small 2,600 dwt general cargo ship with a crew of only five. This was the vessel’s maiden laden voyage following her delivery to owners from a shipyard in Vietnam.  As such she was carrying no spare lashing equipment.

The cargo was stowed by charterer’s appointed stevedores in some haste over a period of approximately seven hours during the early hours.  The Master was not entirely satisfied with the way the stevedores had secured the cargo without locking coils in the single tier rows, as recommended in the vessels cargo securing manual.

Given the practical difficulties in arranging for shore cranes to re-stow the coils, the Master had little choice but to instruct the stevedores to double lash the coils in the single tier rows.

The claimant bill of lading holders alleged that the damage was caused by the un-seaworthiness of the vessel, on the grounds that she had not been properly equipped with additional lashing material and because the crew had failed to carry out cargo inspections during the voyage and/or re-secure the cargo properly.

The claimant’s arguments were rejected by the court. It was accepted that the crew had carried out daily cargo inspections, weather permitting, notwithstanding the omission of any such record in the deck logs.  Furthermore the court, sensibly, considered it unrealistic when the vessel was rolling and having to adopt anti-piracy zone manoeuvres to expect the crew to enter into the hold in order to attempt to re-lash 4-5 ton steel coils. The proximate cause was the failure to use locking coils. The receiver’s claim failed because owners were not contractually responsible for loading and stowing the cargo.

The Admiralty Court’s sympathetic and pragmatic approach to safety at sea is to be welcomed.

Further details of the case here: http://www.hilldickinson.com/publications/marine,_trade_and_energy/2013/june/the_eems_solar_and_responsib.aspx

 

Maritime Reporter March 2015 Digital Edition
FREE Maritime Reporter Subscription
Latest Maritime News    rss feeds

Legal

Largest Vessel to Call ICTSI, Rijeka

Adriatic Gate Container Terminal (AGCT), International Container Terminal Services, Inc.’s (ICTSI) container handling facility in the Port of Rijeka, Croatia, recently

MOL President Reports Slack Performance

MOL President, President, Koichi Muto reported that the performance of the company was slack.   Muto reported, "I am sad to report that our business performance fell short,

Focus on Environment at Suny Maritime

The State University of New York Maritime College’s 140th Anniversary Speaker Series presented a panel discussion on March 26 in the College’s Maritime Academic Center.

 
 
Maritime Contracts Maritime Standards Naval Architecture Navigation Offshore Oil Pod Propulsion Port Authority Ship Electronics Shipbuilding / Vessel Construction Winch
rss | archive | history | articles | privacy | terms and conditions | contributors | top maritime news | about us | copyright | maritime magazines
maritime security news | shipbuilding news | maritime industry | shipping news | maritime reporting | workboats news | ship design | maritime business

Time taken: 0.1687 sec (6 req/sec)