Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
HULL FOULING—CHARTERPARTY ISSUES
The Kitsa
Hull fouling is a well-known problem affecting vessels trading in warm water ports. It can lead to loss of time from diminished vessel performance and lost time and costs associated with hull cleaning. Resulting claims include time charterers’ claims for underperformance and that the vessel is off-hire for the period of hull cleaning. Owners’ claims include damage to the vessel1
due to fouling and claims for indemnity from time charterers for hull cleaning costs and may also include claims for late redelivery. The following factors will be relevant to the determination of such claims. Was the port within the trading limits as provided within the charter? Was the time spent at the warm water port usual and expected for that time of year and for that vessel? Was the marine growth in the water usual and expected for that time of year? Were either of the parties aware of the environmental factors prevailing at that place before the vessel traded there? Bearing these factors in mind, the two principal claims arising out of hull fouling will now be analysed in detail.
1. Cost of defouling
Shipowners have two avenues of recovering such costs. The first is by a claim for a breach of contract. This will usually be established where the shipowners accede to charterer’s order to trade to a port that is out of the limits specified by the charter and fouling occurs while the vessel is at that port. In such an instance the costs of defouling will be recoverable by way of damages provided that the shipowners can show that the fouling was directly caused as a result of compliance with charterer’s illegitimate order and secondly that the resulting loss is not too remote under the principles set out in Hadley
v. Baxendale
.2
The first requirement should be easily satisfied in that had the vessel not gone to the out of limits port she would not have suffered hull fouling. The fact that the shipowners have agreed to comply with the illegitimate order will not amount to a waiver of their right to claim damages for resulting losses but only of their right to require fresh