Srihariram S

ASL21075 Group-2

Marine law assignment

1. The vessel ‘A’ was proceeding too fast in a narrow channel with an inadequate
lookout on board. Vessel ‘B’ was proceeding in the opposite direction. Vessel ‘A’
failed to observe vessel ‘B’ until too late resulting in a collision. As a result, vessel
‘B’ was towed to dry-dock and required extensive repairs to its damaged hull. Advise
the shipowners of the vessel ‘B’ of their legal rights and remedies against the
shipowners of the vessel ‘A’, particularly in relation to the quantum of their claim.

The ship owner (vessel-B) has full rights to retain the vessel-A because the fault was fully on vessel-A
for not noticing vessel-B. The Shipowner of Vessel-A has to repay and repair the damages occurred.
If he failed to pay the shipowner (vessel-B) then he has full rights to file a case against the Vessel-A

2. A vessel was chartered to carry a cargo to Kolkata, India pursuant to a berth

charterparty containing a WIBON and ‘Always Accessible Clause.’ Upon the vessel’s
arrival, the berth was occupied and a few weeks later the vessel proceeded to berth
and discharged part of her cargo. Afterwards the vessel was ordered to the anchorage
because the charterers/ receivers had not paid customs dues on the remaining part of
her cargo. Seven weeks later, the vessel is still at the anchorage with part of her cargo
on board. The Owners are concerned, as they have not received any money from the
charterers apart from freight. Advise the owners as to their legal rights and remedies

As per Indian contract act 1872, The chatterer is required to pay the accepted money which was
mentioned in charter party agreement. If the charterer has any other problem means he can request the
shipowner and pay accordingly. If there is no reason for delay means then the shipowner can
terminate his contract under violation of agreement. The owner can take this to arbitrator if there is
any further delay in payment.

3. A shipbroker, receives from a shipowner instruction in relation to fixing a ship for

50,000 tonnes of grain as soon as reasonably possible, at $100 dollars per tonne.
Having confirmed and accepted shipowner’s instructions, the shipbroker observes the
relevant markets and finds a more favourable fix than the $100 dollars per tonne. The
shipbroker therefore fixes at $150 dollars per tonne, having thereby made the
shipowner (principal) a considerable profit. When the shipbroker communicates the
fixture to shipowner, explaining that he acted in shipowner’s best interest, shipowner
complains for not fixing at $100 dollars per tonne and explains that shipowner needed
to show a lower profit in the shipping company’s accounting books. Advise the
shipbroker. Use relevant case law to support your answer.

The ship broker act is a ratification which means acting on his own on behalf of his principle which he
done for his principle benefit. But turns out as contract breach according to his principle. The broker
is fully liable for ship owner.