1 / 7

International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October 2005

International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October 2005. Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London. CASE STUDY 1. Large bulk carrier with major structural damage deep sea. SCOPIC invoked immediately. Long services. Salved values: US$26 million

barny
Download Presentation

International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International Marine Claims ConferenceDublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

  2. CASE STUDY 1 Large bulk carrier with major structural damage deep sea. SCOPIC invoked immediately. Long services. Salved values: US$26 million SCOPIC costs: US$20 million Article 13 assessment: ± US$15 million Issues: • Hull/P&I in disagreement over Article 13. • Hull wishes to make formal settlement offer. • P&I do not. • SCOPIC costs agreed – who pays for arbitration. • Owner caught in middle. • No leverage over cargo.

  3. CASE STUDY 2 Small loaded container ship with heavy damage. SCOPIC invoked immediately. Long services. Salved values: US$7 million SCOPIC costs: US$3 million Article 13 assessment: ±US$3.5 million Delay in port entry due securities formalities, SCOPIC day cost US$50,000 Issues: • Container terminal required onerous L/G to permit discharge ($200,000). • Container/cargo owners will not provide. • Owner impecunious but in any event:

  4. CASE STUDY 2 • No recourse if he provides (not GA). • No claim on P&I (? sue and labour). • Salvor won’t/not obliged to provide. • P&I forced to pay to save SCOPIC exposure which did not exist before. • Should LOF Arbitrator be told of the SCOPIC costs when determining Article 13 award?

  5. CASE STUDY 3 Small bulker immobilised deep sea. Expected salved fund US$20 million. Salvors negligently lose tow in proximity to hostile coast. Ship grounds heavily – SCOPIC invoked. Ship CTL. Wreck removal notice. Authorities refuse release Salvors. Issues: • Salvors ‘benefit’ from own negligence? • P&I must provide SCOPIC security • Subrogated H&M have claim for negligence • P&I has claim for negligence • Assessment of damages, set-off, limitation • No Art 18 in SCOPIC

  6. CASE STUDY 4 Chip carrier aground on rocks – probable CTL. SCOPIC invoked immediately. Bunker removal – wood chip cargo contaminated with bunkers. Impossible to remove all traces of bunkers from ship/cargo without complete removal. Wreck removal notice. Issues: • Code of Practice ISU/P&I – no unreasonable termination • Spirit of SCOPIC – ongoing pollution threat • Complete wreck removal cheaper by renegotiation than under SCOPIC tariff • When/should notice of termination be given? • Politics

  7. International Marine Claims ConferenceDublin October 2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

More Related