• (Anti-)Suit Up! When does a ‘security action’ breach a jurisdiction agreement? | Case by Case (Ep. 26)

    In this episode of Case by Case, Luke and Calum discuss the breach of a jurisdiction agreement by a ’security action‘.

  • Did someone turn the lights off? | Case by Case (Ep. 25)

    We’re back from a brief break with a fresh episode of Case by Case. This time Luke and Calum review London Arbitration 16/22.

  • Silver Base Jumping in the Cayman Islands | Case by Case (Ep. 24)

    We welcome Ben Hobden, partner at Forbes Hare’s Cayman Islands office, specialising in all areas of insolvency, restructuring and commercial litigation. We are delighted to have Ben on the podcast, discussing a very interesting development in the law regarding insolvency and restructuring for Cayman domiciled companies listed in foreign territories.

    Read more about Ben here.

  • Case by Case: LIVE at the SMA! | Case by Case (Ep. 23)

    This week is a big „first“ for Case by Case – our first „Live“ episode!

    Following an invitation from the Society of Maritime Arbitrators in New York, this episode is Calum and Luke discussing the hugely significant case of the Eternal Bliss.

    The Eternal Bliss has been said to be one of the most important demurrage cases in recent years. It certainly splits opinion (and this recording is no different).

    I suppose all that is left to say is that Case by Case is now formally accepting invitations for live speaking slots!

  • Adedoyin Afun, on the Nigerian Jurisdiction for an Arrest over Unpaid Crew Wages | Case by Case (Ep. 22)

    For the first time, we welcome an external colleague onto the show. Among many accolades and prestigious awards, Ade is a highly-respected Nigerian lawyer, with an expertise in maritime disputes.

    Ade joins Luke and Calum on today’s episode to discuss a recent decision in the Nigerian Courts, the effect of which appears to constrain the ability of the Nigerian Courts to give an order for a vessel arrest in respect of unpaid crew wages. Good news for Owners – but a decision that would make the Nigerian Court system a real outlier.

    This conversation discusses issues of constitutional law and the problems that can arise where a codified constitution comes into conflict with a historical right of arrest.

    Ade’s profile can be found here.

  • A Classic Case of „Who Dunnage? | Case by Case (Ep. 21)

    Luke and Calum review London Arbitration 5/22 – A decision which looks at issues involving mitigation, remoteness and correctly particularising a damages claim.

    During the podcast, Calum references Court of Appeal obiter comments, which deal with a potentially large claim for failure to re-deliver a vessel on time. The case is The Achilleas, and the citation is: Transfield Shipping v. Mercator Shipping (The Achilleas) [2007] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 555 (C.A.). The relevant passage is Rix LJ’s comments at Para 122 and is set out below:

    As for illegitimate voyages, it seems to me that special considerations may arise here, but they have not been the subject of any debate before us, and I would be cautious about expressing any opinion. I would merely mention the possibility that an illegitimate voyage, being outside the contract and, if insisted upon, an anticipatory breach in repudiation of it (The Gregos), may amount in effect to a form of new offer: so that, if an owner in response says „No, but I warn you that I have fixed the vessel for a new charter, and if you insist on the voyage and I perform it, not waiving my right to damages, and I lose my new fixture, I will look to you for compensation“, it is not impossible that, albeit late in the day, the charterer will be fixed with knowledge of the new charter (see Mr Gross QC arguendo in The Gregos in the Court of Appeal at [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 335 at page 345, albeit cf Scrutton’s comment at page 349 at footnote 11). That is not very different from what the parties agreed in The Gregos.