SEA MASTER SHIPPING INC V ARAB BANK (SWITZERLAND) LTD AND ANOTHER

[2020] EWHC 2030 (Comm), Commercial Court, Queen’s Bench Division, His Honour Judge Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court Judge), 28 July 2020

Contracts of carriage – Bills of lading – Implied terms – Obligation to discharge the vessel – Responsibility for and cost of discharging

The claimants were the assignees of the registered owners of the MV Sea Master, who by a voyage charter on the Norgrain 89 form chartered the vessel to a charterer who was now in insolvent liquidation. The first defendant was a bank involved in financing the cargo carried under the contract of carriage contained in or evidenced by a bill of lading dated 7 November 2016. The second defendant was the receiver of that cargo, had taken delivery and was the holder of the bill of lading. The cargo in question was corn, soya bean meal and soya pellets loaded in Argentina for discharge in Morocco, which in the event were discharged in Lebanon following a complicated arrangement involving two sets of switch bills. The bill of lading incorporated all the "... terms, conditions, liberties and exceptions ..." of the voyage charter. In arbitration, the bank claimed damages for misdelivery and shipowners claimed against both defendants for demurrage or damages in lieu. This was the shipowner’s appeal on the question of law as to whether it was an implied term that the bank or receivers would take all necessary steps to enable the cargo to be discharged and delivered within a reasonable time, or would discharge the cargo within a reasonable time?