law
"...... the shipowners' undertaking to tender a seaworthy ship, has as a result of numerous decisions as to what can amount to 'unseaworthiness', become one of the most complex of contractual undertakings. It embraces obligations with respect to every part of the hull and machinery, stores and equipment and the crew itself. It can be broken by the presence of trivial defects easily and rapidly remedial, as well as by defects which must inevitably result in a total loss of the vessel." per Diplock LJ in The Hong Kong Fir Shipping case [1962] 2 QB 26 (CA). In the Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co.,Ltd v. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd case the principals were indeed fundamental. The plaintiffs (owners) had chartered the Hong Kong Fir to the defendants (charterers) for twenty-four months from delivery to the charterers in Liverpool. The vessel was delivered in Liverpool on February 13th 1957. The vessel then started it voyage to America to get a cargo of coal. It then left for Osaka and was delayed by five weeks due to the repairs needed on the engine. On arrival to Osaka the vessel was found to need more repairs due to the vessel being in very bad condition, and was worke
The Hong Kong Fir case had its effect on consumer law also. On the other hand the owner was making vast money compared to the present freight rates. The other information to do with this case was that there was a steep fall in freight rates from 47s in June to 13s. It can be seen that Diplock LJ, saw the potential of this happening every time the charterer saw an opportunity elsewhere. The Law Commission recommended that the consumers right to reject for any breach of a term implied by ss13 to 15. ' If a contract is broken and one party claims to be entitled to terminate, the first thing that must be established is the breach a breach of condition. Repudiation is a remedy, and its effect is to terminate the contract. instead the elected to terminate the contract. This term can be broken in many different ways from the trivial to the serious and it is impractical to to attempt to asses the seriousness of the breach without first paying attention to the way in which it has been broken. 'This could have been why it was considered a breach of warranty, to protect the shipowners. This clearly indicated that the charterer could be paying less if they started another time charter. The buyer had to give 15 days notice of the rediness of the vessel, but only gave notice on the 17 June. It could be said that this is exactly what the charterers did, because they could have not accepted the vessel in the condition it was in when it arrived at Liverpool, they had a week before the contract began. Diplock LJ during the Hong Kong Fir case opened up the way for modifications of remedies for breach of implied terms. This was believed because one of the clauses in a time charter contract is that the ship has to be 'seaworthy.
Common topics in this essay:
Diplock LJ,
September Charterers,
Kong Fir,
Lord Wilberforce,
Law Commission,
Liverpool February,
SEA ASSIGNMENT,
Tradex SA1981,
House Lords,
Kaisha Ltd,
diplock lj,
kong fir,
terminate contract,
hong kong fir,
hong kong,
contract ship,
breach term,
breach contract,
kong fir shipping,
action damages,
engine staff,
lj hong,
lj hong kong,
diplock lj hong,
|
Acceptance Essays
