In accordance with Marubeni’s instructions, the MV Great Prosperity loaded a cargo of soya bean in Montevideo, Uruguay. The cargo loaded in Uruguay comprised nine parcels but there was a single shipper noted in the bill of lading, being “LOC Uruguay SA”. The bill of lading noted that the “cargo was shipped in apparent good order and condition on board the vessel”. On arrival at Qingdao, China, the cargo was found to be in “a discrepant condition allegedly due to moisture migration and self-heating”. Moreover, it was noted that the moisture content of the cargo was “very high” before loading. The receivers of the cargo claimed damages of approximately US$9.3 million, which was passed down the chain of sub-charterparties to Intergis, who is pursuing a claim against Marubeni in London by way of arbitration proceedings.

The claim is that, pursuant to the charterparty between Intergis and Marubeni, Marubeni is liable to indemnify Intergis in respect of any liability incurred by Intergis to UBCI, and then up the chain of sub-charterparties. The cause of action was that, as a result of loading dangerous cargo without the knowledge and consent of the carrier, the charterer is contractually liable, by virtue of an implied indemnity, to indemnify the carrier against all damages and expenses directly or indirectly arising out of or resulting from such shipment.

For the purpose of providing security for this claim, Intergis had the MV IVS Crimson Creek arrested as an associated ship to the MV Great Prosperity, pursuant to s.3(6) and (7) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act.2 Marubeni applied to set aside the arrest of the MV IVS Crimson Creek on the basis that Intergis had not established