In recent years, environmental regulatory requirements have dictated that marine fuels should be low in sulphur, a major pollutant, largely responsible for "acid rain".

The Rome Convention (last updated 1980) provides that in the EU, and in the absence of an express choice of law clause, a contract will be governed by the law of the country with which it is most closely connected.

CPR Part 18.1 provides for the court to make an order requiring a party to clarify any matter which is disputed in legal proceedings, alternatively to give additional information in relation to such a matter.

This case arose out of dispute between the owners and charterers of a vessel called “Nicholas M”. vessel was under a time charter providing for London arbitration and English law

Those not in the coal and iron ore market may not be familiar with RightShip. This is a ship approval system set up in 2001 and maintained by BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto Shipping and Cargill Ocean Transportation.

This is a shipping case that was originally taken to arbitration. In brief, the facts are as follows: there was a time charterparty regarding the vessel "Achilleas", under which charterers gave notice of redelivery between 30 April and 20 May 2004.

This case involves the familiar scenario in commercial contractual relations known as a "battle of the forms".

The London Maritime Arbitrators Association (‘LMAA’) has three main arbitration procedures and terms that may be chosen by parties agreeing to arbitrate,

HMD and ERS entered into 4 shipbuilding contracts under which HMD would build 4 container vessels for ERS.

A recent planning case which reached the Court of Appeal has raised an issue which will be of interest to litigators in all areas beyond planning law.

In this case, the claimants were three Lloyd’s Syndicates (“Syndicates”) for various years of account between 1999 and 2006.

This case involved Lloyd's Syndicates who were reinsured by the predecessor to AXA under first loss reinsurance contracts relating to construction and operating risks in connection with oil rigs.

"Anyone with any sense knows that litigation is expensive. Anyone with any sense knows that litigation is more expensive than one's worst fears. Anyone with any sense would avoid litigation. Commercial men should look at their balance sheet rather than the pleadings."

This was a dispute which was originally taken to ICC arbitration in London and a final arbitration award made in favour of the Claimants.

Under the Marine Insurance Act 1906, a distinction is made between valued and unvalued policies of insurance.

This is a shipping dispute that was initially dealt with in arbitration but subsequently appealed to the Commercial Court pursuant to section 69 Arbitration Act 1996. Somewhat surprisingly, given the courts’ usual reluctance to overturn arbitration awards except in extenuating circumstances, in this case, Mr. Justice Tomlinson decided the arbitration award should be set aside.

The recent case of “Dunlop Hawyards (DHL) Ltd v Erinaceous Insurance Services Ltd v Lockton” [2008] EWHC 520 Comm has shed further light on the potential pitfalls that may arise where more than one broker is involved in placing insurance on behalf of an assured.

In the shipbuilding industry, the refund guarantee is often an essential document because it allows the buyer and its financiers to hold security from the shipyard which will respond in the event that the ship is not delivered.

This case raised the question of whether the detention by pirates of the MV SALDAHNA (the ‘Vessel’), or the effects of piracy entitled charterers to argue that the vessel was off-hire in accordance with cl.15 of the NYPE form of Charterparty agreed by the parties in the Charterparty dated 25th June 2008.

The present economic crisis and the ferocity with which owners and charterers are fighting charterparty disputes have recently increased the instances of scrutiny by the courts of numerous charterparty clauses.