Suez blocked by stuck ship!
Discussion
The Mad Monk said:
According to The Internet, 'Marsaxlokk is a small, traditional fishing village'...!I thought the place to park a big ship in Malta was Valetta - SS Ohio and all that...
Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 7th August 09:59
Simpo Two said:
The Mad Monk said:
According to The Internet, 'Marsaxlokk is a small, traditional fishing village'...!I htought the place to park a big ship in Malta was Valetta - SS Ohio and all that...
The second time about ten years ago, the view from Marsaxlokk was dominated by a newly-built container port, built, I'm told with Chinese money, to enable the containers on ships from the Far East to be transferred to smaller ships that would take their cargos to ports thoughout Europe.
Edited by GliderRider on Friday 6th August 22:55
It's on it's way back from Felixstowe
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-58288...
empty???
Do we have nothing to export to the far east?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-58288...
empty???
Do we have nothing to export to the far east?
saaby93 said:
It's on it's way back from Felixstowe
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-58288...
empty???
Do we have nothing to export to the far east?
Maybe a precaution in case the Suez authorities decided to detain it again?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-58288...
empty???
Do we have nothing to export to the far east?
That or she needs repairs that prevent her taking on new cargo?
Ever Given takes return leg through Suez Canal EVER GIVEN has braved the Suez Canal again as it makes its long-delayed return to Asia for repairs.
This morning it joined the southbound convoy and vessel tracking data Lloyd’s List
Intelligence shows that as of 0945 hrs today Ever Given was six miles north of Ismailia
steaming at 9 knots
It is currently in the two-way section of the expanded canal, north of the Great Bitter Lake,
where it was detained for several months during a dispute over compensation between the
vessel’s owner and the Suez Canal Authority.
Should it successfully navigate the narrow single channel that it grounded in, the unladen Ever Given will proceed to Singapore
for repairs.
This morning it joined the southbound convoy and vessel tracking data Lloyd’s List
Intelligence shows that as of 0945 hrs today Ever Given was six miles north of Ismailia
steaming at 9 knots
It is currently in the two-way section of the expanded canal, north of the Great Bitter Lake,
where it was detained for several months during a dispute over compensation between the
vessel’s owner and the Suez Canal Authority.
Should it successfully navigate the narrow single channel that it grounded in, the unladen Ever Given will proceed to Singapore
for repairs.
zorba_the_greek said:
Ever Given takes return leg through Suez Canal EVER GIVEN has braved the Suez Canal again as it makes its long-delayed return to Asia for repairs.
This morning it joined the southbound convoy and vessel tracking data Lloyd’s List
Intelligence shows that as of 0945 hrs today Ever Given was six miles north of Ismailia
steaming at 9 knots
It is currently in the two-way section of the expanded canal, north of the Great Bitter Lake,
where it was detained for several months during a dispute over compensation between the
vessel’s owner and the Suez Canal Authority.
Should it successfully navigate the narrow single channel that it grounded in, the unladen Ever Given will proceed to Singapore
for repairs.
Er. I may be mistake, but I think you are mistaken.This morning it joined the southbound convoy and vessel tracking data Lloyd’s List
Intelligence shows that as of 0945 hrs today Ever Given was six miles north of Ismailia
steaming at 9 knots
It is currently in the two-way section of the expanded canal, north of the Great Bitter Lake,
where it was detained for several months during a dispute over compensation between the
vessel’s owner and the Suez Canal Authority.
Should it successfully navigate the narrow single channel that it grounded in, the unladen Ever Given will proceed to Singapore
for repairs.
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/shipid:5...
Which shows it in the Gulf of Suez.
The Mad Monk said:
zorba_the_greek said:
Ever Given takes return leg through Suez Canal EVER GIVEN has braved the Suez Canal again as it makes its long-delayed return to Asia for repairs.
This morning it joined the southbound convoy and vessel tracking data Lloyd’s List
Intelligence shows that as of 0945 hrs today Ever Given was six miles north of Ismailia
steaming at 9 knots
It is currently in the two-way section of the expanded canal, north of the Great Bitter Lake,
where it was detained for several months during a dispute over compensation between the
vessel’s owner and the Suez Canal Authority.
Should it successfully navigate the narrow single channel that it grounded in, the unladen Ever Given will proceed to Singapore
for repairs.
Er. I may be mistake, but I think you are mistaken.This morning it joined the southbound convoy and vessel tracking data Lloyd’s List
Intelligence shows that as of 0945 hrs today Ever Given was six miles north of Ismailia
steaming at 9 knots
It is currently in the two-way section of the expanded canal, north of the Great Bitter Lake,
where it was detained for several months during a dispute over compensation between the
vessel’s owner and the Suez Canal Authority.
Should it successfully navigate the narrow single channel that it grounded in, the unladen Ever Given will proceed to Singapore
for repairs.
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/shipid:5...
Which shows it in the Gulf of Suez.
Ever Given owners expected to mount error of navigation defence
THE owners and charterers of the vessel that blocked the Suez Canal are expected to maintain
that the incident was caused by an error of navigation, insurers have heard.
International Union of Marine Insurance
conference. The grounding of Ever Given (IMO: 9811000)
resulted in a $916m insurance claim from the Suez
Canal Authority, operators of the key waterway
which was closed for six days in March.
While the eventual settlement is not in the public
domain, the marine insurance grapevine suggests
that it was less than half that sum, and perhaps as
little as one quarter.
The physical damage claim and a $300m element for
loss of reputation were P&I exposures, and not of
direct concern to cargo insurers.
But the initial $577m salvage claim — whatever it
was settled for — falls within the scope of general
average, where claims must be set at a “reasonable”
level.
In this case, the English courts will decide what is
reasonable and what is not.
The cause of the casualty is being investigated by
flag state Panama and by the SCA.
Flag state inquiries take time and cannot be used in
legal proceedings. It remains to be seen whether the
SCA inquiry will be able to be used in litigation.
From a cargo perspective, in terms of liability,
Japanese owners Shoei Kisen Kaisha and time
charterers Evergreen need to establish due diligence
was exercised before and at the commencement of
the voyage to make the vessel seaworthy.
“We are expecting that the carriers and the owners
will argue that the groundings will be caused by an
error of navigation, which is of course a defence or
exclusion of liability under the Hague or Hague-
Visby Rules,” said Mr Sharma.
“To overcome the error of navigation defence and
successfully defeat the claim of general average,
cargo interests will need to establish a breach of the
contract of carriage by owners.”
That breach must be causative of unseaworthiness,
which under English law means a contributory cause
rather than the sole or dominant cause of a casualty.
The Ever Given casualty might offer cargo insurers
an apposite opportunity to consider their exposures
on this type of vessel, Mr Sharma suggested.
“They might not only expand your liability, making
you liable for things you didn’t expect, but they
might also restrict liability,” Mr Neylon said. “There
might be knock-for-knock arrangements, there
might be exclusions, particularly for consequential
losses. There might even be exclusions of liability
built into that contract.”
However, there will be no contractual obligations to
most parties, which will likely mean law of tort and
of civil wrongs applies.
Cargo insurers seeking to defeat the claim of
general average will therefore need to establish
breach of the contract of carriage, Clyde & Co’s
head of cargo casualty Jai Sharma told the
“Concentration of risk on these huge containerships
is a very well-known problem and the location of
this casualty is not really important. This type of
issue can arise anywhere in the world, potentially.”
Ever Given was at the time worth $120-$150m, and
is likely to be worth more now, given the recent
explosion in vessel values for boxships.
Its cargo and boxes at the time of the grounding
were worth around $750m.
Cargo is therefore exposed to around 80% of the
general average claim, and the present estimate is a
hit of over $150m for the cargo market,
approximately a quarter of the value of cargo.
Hull and machinery insurers will pay their
proportion of salvage legally due from the vessel,
and cargo insurers are in principle on the hook for
the cargo share.
Senior shipping lawyer Richard Neylon, of HFW,
addressed the liability issues arising from the
blocking of international waterways in a separate
IUMI conference session.
He said he was speaking hypothetically, given that
Ever Given is an active case with active disputes, in
which HFW is involved.
Instead, he referred to the potential for things to go
wrong at Southampton, his home town, with implicit
reference to the grounding of car carrier Höegh
Osaka in 2015.
Many key waterways feature narrow channels,
perhaps with a single point of entry or exit, and large
vessels with deep drafts consequently experience
restricted manoeuvrability. The potential for thirdparty
losses is substantial.
Potential liabilities for shipowners include loss or
damage of cargo, delay, salvage and charter party/
off-hire, all broadly familiar.
Damage to port infrastructure would entail liability,
and in some cases, strict liability, or even criminal
liability.
The first question shipowners should ask is whether
they have any contractual relationship with any
terminal in the port, which they probably do.
If going through canals or regulated waterways, they
also need to know the terms and conditions of use.
For instance, a ship behind your vessel may have to
take evasive action and may ground itself. Other
vessels may find themselves stuck inside a port, or
perhaps unable to access it, or maybe have to use a
different discharge port.
Relevant concepts under English law include
whether a duty of care exists, whether it was
breached, and what losses were caused thereby. The
type of loss is also pertinent.
THE owners and charterers of the vessel that blocked the Suez Canal are expected to maintain
that the incident was caused by an error of navigation, insurers have heard.
International Union of Marine Insurance
conference. The grounding of Ever Given (IMO: 9811000)
resulted in a $916m insurance claim from the Suez
Canal Authority, operators of the key waterway
which was closed for six days in March.
While the eventual settlement is not in the public
domain, the marine insurance grapevine suggests
that it was less than half that sum, and perhaps as
little as one quarter.
The physical damage claim and a $300m element for
loss of reputation were P&I exposures, and not of
direct concern to cargo insurers.
But the initial $577m salvage claim — whatever it
was settled for — falls within the scope of general
average, where claims must be set at a “reasonable”
level.
In this case, the English courts will decide what is
reasonable and what is not.
The cause of the casualty is being investigated by
flag state Panama and by the SCA.
Flag state inquiries take time and cannot be used in
legal proceedings. It remains to be seen whether the
SCA inquiry will be able to be used in litigation.
From a cargo perspective, in terms of liability,
Japanese owners Shoei Kisen Kaisha and time
charterers Evergreen need to establish due diligence
was exercised before and at the commencement of
the voyage to make the vessel seaworthy.
“We are expecting that the carriers and the owners
will argue that the groundings will be caused by an
error of navigation, which is of course a defence or
exclusion of liability under the Hague or Hague-
Visby Rules,” said Mr Sharma.
“To overcome the error of navigation defence and
successfully defeat the claim of general average,
cargo interests will need to establish a breach of the
contract of carriage by owners.”
That breach must be causative of unseaworthiness,
which under English law means a contributory cause
rather than the sole or dominant cause of a casualty.
The Ever Given casualty might offer cargo insurers
an apposite opportunity to consider their exposures
on this type of vessel, Mr Sharma suggested.
“They might not only expand your liability, making
you liable for things you didn’t expect, but they
might also restrict liability,” Mr Neylon said. “There
might be knock-for-knock arrangements, there
might be exclusions, particularly for consequential
losses. There might even be exclusions of liability
built into that contract.”
However, there will be no contractual obligations to
most parties, which will likely mean law of tort and
of civil wrongs applies.
Cargo insurers seeking to defeat the claim of
general average will therefore need to establish
breach of the contract of carriage, Clyde & Co’s
head of cargo casualty Jai Sharma told the
“Concentration of risk on these huge containerships
is a very well-known problem and the location of
this casualty is not really important. This type of
issue can arise anywhere in the world, potentially.”
Ever Given was at the time worth $120-$150m, and
is likely to be worth more now, given the recent
explosion in vessel values for boxships.
Its cargo and boxes at the time of the grounding
were worth around $750m.
Cargo is therefore exposed to around 80% of the
general average claim, and the present estimate is a
hit of over $150m for the cargo market,
approximately a quarter of the value of cargo.
Hull and machinery insurers will pay their
proportion of salvage legally due from the vessel,
and cargo insurers are in principle on the hook for
the cargo share.
Senior shipping lawyer Richard Neylon, of HFW,
addressed the liability issues arising from the
blocking of international waterways in a separate
IUMI conference session.
He said he was speaking hypothetically, given that
Ever Given is an active case with active disputes, in
which HFW is involved.
Instead, he referred to the potential for things to go
wrong at Southampton, his home town, with implicit
reference to the grounding of car carrier Höegh
Osaka in 2015.
Many key waterways feature narrow channels,
perhaps with a single point of entry or exit, and large
vessels with deep drafts consequently experience
restricted manoeuvrability. The potential for thirdparty
losses is substantial.
Potential liabilities for shipowners include loss or
damage of cargo, delay, salvage and charter party/
off-hire, all broadly familiar.
Damage to port infrastructure would entail liability,
and in some cases, strict liability, or even criminal
liability.
The first question shipowners should ask is whether
they have any contractual relationship with any
terminal in the port, which they probably do.
If going through canals or regulated waterways, they
also need to know the terms and conditions of use.
For instance, a ship behind your vessel may have to
take evasive action and may ground itself. Other
vessels may find themselves stuck inside a port, or
perhaps unable to access it, or maybe have to use a
different discharge port.
Relevant concepts under English law include
whether a duty of care exists, whether it was
breached, and what losses were caused thereby. The
type of loss is also pertinent.
Looks as though it is finally going into port to get the first load of cargo since the Suez incident.
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:...
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:...
Ever Given is in port in Qingdao to have her snout attended to.
http://www.news.cn/english/2021-10/04/c_1310226464...
http://www.news.cn/english/2021-10/04/c_1310226464...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff