header-logo header-logo

SHIPPING—CHARTERPARTY—SAFE PORT

24 May 2007
Issue: 7274 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

AIC Ltd v Marine Pilot Ltd [2007] EWHC 1182 (Comm), [2007] All ER (D) 280(May)

Queen’s Bench Division (Commercial Court)
Gloster J
17 May 2007

The phrase “1 safe port Ventspils” in an amended Asbatankvoy form is not merely a mutual agreement between the owner and charterer that the port is in fact safe, but a warranty by the charterer; moreover, a port can be rendered unsafe because of a need for lightering to get into or out of it. “Safely” means “safely as a laden ship”; there can be no distinction between loading and discharging.

Steven Berry QC and Edmund King (instructed by Holman Fenwick) for the claimant.  Timothy Young QC (instructed by Eversheds) for the defendant.

The proceedings concerned a charter substantially on the Asbatankvoy form and incorporating the charterer’s standard terms. The vessel was an Aframax oil tanker. The voyages were to load gasoil “1 safe port Ventspils” with discharge to various ports in named locations. A dispute arose concerning the sixth voyage, when the vessel arrived at Venspils to load a cargo. Due to previous

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll