Eleftheria Niki Compania Naviera Panama v. Eastern Mediterranean Marine Ltd. - Mr. Justice Mocatta - Q.B. (Com.Ct.) - Mar. 3, 1980

Whether award should be remitted for fresh evidence - Costs

By an arbitration award dated Mar. 12, 1979 charterers (under a time charter on the New York Produce Exchange Form) recovered damages amounting to $11,500 from owners on the grounds that the owners had given negligent advice to the charterers concerning the date at which the vessel was estimated to leave dry dock thereby causing the charterers to delay making new arrangements for the further employment of the vessel. The advice was given in a telephone conversation between the owners’ managing agents and the charterers’ representative. The owners applied to have the award remitted to the Umpire so that he could consider fresh evidence from their port Captain to the effect that in an alleged earlier conversation he had informed the charterers’ representative that the vessel might require extensive repairs in dry dock. The owners relied on the fact that the plea of negligent mis-statement was only introduced by amendment on the second day of a few days’ arbitration and contended that this evidence would negative a point firstly made in final argument by Counsel for the charterers that it was negligent of the owners not to have disclosed the possibility that the vessel might have to undergo extensive repairs in dry dock. The owners also sought a remission on the question of costs on the ground that the charterers had failed on their other ways of putting their case in respect of the dry dock (which included allegations of unseaworthiness and breach of express and/or implied terms of the charter-party).