Bulk Uruguay


  • Date: 01/01/2014

In this case the sub-charterer of the ship argued that the requirement for a disponent owner to seek permission from a head owner to transit the Gulf of Aden evinced an intention not to perform its obligations under the relevant charter. Mr Justice Popplewell held that the sub-charterer was seeking to appeal a finding of fact by dressing it up as an issue of law. He held that there was no error of law and rejected the sub-charterer’s argument. He stated:

Words or conduct which give rise to the uncertainty of future performance, the contingency of which rests upon conduct of a third party, will not necessarily evince an intention not to be bound.”