Is a storm warning sufficient to interrupt laytime? and if bad weather prevents the lightering barges from coming alongside the mother vessel then who bears the risk? These and some more interesting questions came up in London Arbitration 12/19.
Vessel was at the waiting area with NOR having been tendered for loading when storm warning was issued. Due to the storm warning the charterers excluded two days from laytime. It was held that a storm warning is no more than a threat and could not interrupt laytime, which was to be measured WWD. It was also disputed NOR was invalid but WIPON provision was there to shield the owners.
At disch. port bad wx prevented lighters from coming to & laying alongside the mother vsl but the mother could still have performed cargo ops. Tribunal held that that the weather did not prevent cargo operations in the sense of removal from c/holds. It was for charterers to procure the lighters and position them alongside the vessel.
Vessel was waiting to load when an official decree closed the Kerch strait. Charterers attempted to rely on the force majeure clause. Tribunal however found that vessel would not have shifted earlier in any case due to no cargo / barges being available. Absence of a causal connection dented charterers’ case.
Comments