|
|
 |
|
| |
 
Shipping & Energy Seminar re-scheduled - 08 July 2009
This re-scheduled special event is organised by the LSLC and the Norwegian British Chamber of Commerce. For full details of the Programme and registration please refer to the document below:
http://www.london-shipping-law.com |
Return to top
Competition Law and the Maritime Sector - 01 July 2009
On 1 July 2008 the European Commission adopted the “Guidelines on the application of competition rules to the maritime sector”. One year on, how have the Guidelines worked in practice? In this difficult economic climate, have they helped or hindered the maritime sector to assess agreements and activities to ensure compliance with the competition rules?
This seminar will address these questions and consider how companies can successfully “self assess” their agreements and activities.
Chairperson - Marjorie Holmes - Reed Smith
Keynote speaker - Hubert de Broca - DG Competition, the European Commission.
Panellists
Paolo Palmigiano - the BT Group
Lesley Davey - Reed Smith
Philip Wareham - Holman Fenwick Willan
Matthew Levitt - Lovells
Wednesday 1st July 2009
4.00pm for 4.30pm
Venue: Reed Smith LLP,
The Broadgate Tower,
20 Primrose Street,
London EC2A 2RS
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points by the Bar Standards Board and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (Ref: IU/UCL)
|
Return to top
Arbitration and Third Parties - 17 June 2009
Issues to be discussed:
- Parties to the arbitration agreement - Who are non-parties?
- Joinder
- Interim and Final orders - the effect upon non-parties how their interests are taken into account
- Production/non-production of documents by non-parties
- Enforcement of interim orders and non-parties
- Confidentiality and non-parties
Chairman:
TBA
Panellists:
Steven Gee QC – Stone Chambers
George Burn – Head Int’l Arbitration at Salans
Huw Dundas – Int’l Oil and Gas Arbitrator
Dr Sebastian Besson – Python & Peter law firm (Geneva)
Wednesday 17th June 2009, 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Hosted at: SALANS
Millennium Bridge House, 2 Lambeth Hill, London, EC4V 4AJ
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points by the Bar Standards Board and the Law Society (Ref: IU/UCL)
|
Return to top
Impact of Rome I and II - New Choice of Law Rules in Contract and Tort - 26 May 2009
Lawyers and commercial practitioners will soon need to grapple with the radical changes introduced by the Rome I & Rome II Regulations providing rules for the applicable law in relation to contractual and non-contractual obligations. Rome I completes the harmonization at Community level of the rules of private international law on civil and commercial matters. Rome II will be relevant to shipping with regard to damage caused by defective products and environmental pollution. At this event, the issues will include:
o Rome I Overview
o Freedom of choice, contracts of carriage provisions (Arts 3,5)
o Overriding mandatory provisions
o Rome II Overview
o Freedom of choice (Art 14)
o Maritime torts of the sea
o Unfair competition – unjust enrichment provisions
o Effect of Rome I & Rome II on Arbitration agreements
Chairman:
Richard Lord QC – Brick Court Chambers
Panellists:
Richard Gwynne - Stephenson Harwood
Fergus Randolph QC - Brick Court Chambers
Professor Jonathan Harris - Serle Court & University of Birmingham
Andrew Dickinson - Consultant to Clifford Chance LLP
Tuesday 26th May 2009, 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Venue: Stephenson Harwood, One St. Paul’s Churchyard, London, EC4M 8SH
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points.
Law Society course reference: IU/UCL
|
Return to top
Unsafe Port and Berth Obligations - 29 April 2009
Issues to be discussed:
• Overview of recent developments
• Issues in the “Archimidis”
• Due diligence under Shelltime 4
• Effect of a “safe berth warranty” where there is no “safe port warranty” and “The Reborn”
Chairman:
The Hon. Mr Justice Teare
Panellists:
Professor Howard Bennett – University of Nottingham
Stewart Buckingham – Quadrant Chambers
Robert Gay – Hill Dickinson
Tom Raphael – 20 Essex Street
Wednesday 29th April 2009, 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Venue: Hill Dickinson, Irongate House, 3 Duke’s Place, London, EC3
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points.
|
Return to top
Funding Litigation - 18 March 2009
Key issues to be discussed:
• What are the funding options for litigants (CFAs, After the Event insurance and Third Party Funding)?
• Champerty and maintenance – is it consigned to history?
• What have been the legal and policy developments in funding?
• What are the liabilities of third parties who fund litigation?
• Who are the funders in the market and what are their criteria for funding
• How do funders carry out their risk assessment before they decide to fund a case?
• What should those representing clients seeking funding of any type be watching out for?
• Are funders regulated and if so in what way?
• What impact has the current economic crisis had on litigation funders?
Chairman:
Ioannis Alexopoulos - DLA
Panellists:
Susan Dunn – Harbour Litigation Funding Ltd
James Popperwell - Addleshaw Goddard LLP
Jeremy Morgan QC - 39 Essex Street
Wednesday 18th March 2009, 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Venue: DLA, 3 Noble Street, London, EC2
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points.
|
Return to top
The pressing risk of piracy: addressing the consequences - 03 March 2009
Introduction
A general discussion on how to manage the risk, insurance implications, GA issues, the effect of piracy on the chartered voyage, and what practical steps have or could be taken by owners and governments in the international scene.
Issues to be discussed include:
• The risk of piracy – update on the international scene
• Insurance issues: Is payment of ransom wise and legal? Is it recoverable? If so, who is liable to pay it?
• General Average issues
• Effect of piracy on the chartered voyage: insured and uninsured risks
• Hull/cargo war risks: insurers’ perspective – ship/cargo safety
• P & I insurer’s perspective – crew safety
Chairman:
Spyros Polemis – Chairman, International Chamber of Shipping
Panellists:
Joe O’Keeffe – Ince & Co.
Stephen Askins – Ince & Co.
Neil Roberts – Lloyd’s Market Association
William Beveridge – Arch Insurance
Stephen Martin – Steamship Insurance Management Services Ltd.
Tuesday 3rd March 2009, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Ince & Co., International House, 1 St Katherine’s Way, London E1
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points.
LSLC members - Free. Non-members - £50.00
|
Return to top
Damages Update - 11 February 2009
Introduction
This topical seminar will review recent developments in the law of damages which are of key importance to all practitioners in the shipping, commercial and competition fields.
Issues to be discussed include:
• Measure of damages in the collision context arising from loss of a fixture, with particular reference to The Front Ace
• Contractual damages for late redelivery under a time charter and the implications of the House of Lords decision in The Achilleas
• Damages in the competition law context, including restitutionary damages.
Chairman:
The Rt. Hon. Sir Anthony Clarke MR
Panellists:
Vasanti Selvaratnam QC – Stone Chambers
Simon Croall QC – Quadrant Chambers
Dominick Kendrick QC - 7 King's Bench Walk
Fergus Randolph - Brick Court Chambers
Time: 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Quadrant Chambers, 10 Fleet Street, London, EC4
The event is accredited for 2 CPD points
|
Return to top
Security for and Enforcement of Claims - 09 February 2009
Rule B attachment against ship owners, operators and charterers have flooded the courts in New York over the last four months for claims based on contracts’ defaults following the rapid collapse in bulk carriers’ freight rates. Rule B permits a claimant to freeze money passing through the USA for security pending arbitration.
Claimants for other types of contract defaults caused by the credit crisis are also seeking to obtain security for their claims in various jurisdictions.
This topical seminar will review recent developments in Rule B attachment orders and also recent incidents and developments in the arrest of ships in South Africa and France.
The Lecture will be video conference linked to Durban.
Chairman:
Archie Bishop – Holman Fenwick Willan
Panellists:
Alan Van Praag - Eaton & Van Winkle (New York)
Timothy Clemens – Jones, Holman Fenwick Willan (Paris)
Shane Dwyer - Shepstone & Wylie (Durban)
Venue:Holman Fenwick Willan, Friary Court, 65 Crutched Friars, London, EC3
Time: 5.30pm for 6.00pm
The event is accredited for 1.5 CPD points |
Return to top
The Effect of the Credit Crisis upon Maritime contracts - 08 December 2008
This is a scenario-based event in which consideration will be given to the present uncertainty in the market about the legal position with regard to withdrawals from contracts or inability to perform due to credit difficulties.
Key issues to be discussed:
• Withdrawal of a buyer from an MOA;
• Cancellation of a shipbuilding contract;
• Default in payment of freight or hire in a chain of charter parties with no identical provisions as to lien on cargo;
• Issues arising from the “Breman Max” litigation
• Contractual or any other legal protection, if any, the other party would have in consequence of withdrawal, cancellation or default.
Chairman:
Jonathan Lux – Ince & Co.
Panellists:
Jeffrey Gruder QC - Essex Court Chambers
David Mildon QC - Essex Court Chambers.
Simon Crookenden QC - Essex Court Chambers
Michael Collett – 20 Essex Street
PLEASE NOTE THE NEW VENUE IS: Marsh Ltd.
Tower Place East,
Tower Hill,
London, EC3.
Time: 6.00pm - 8.00pm
Attendance is strictly through pre-registration - shipping@ucl.ac.uk
|
Return to top
The Front Comor: the Advocate General’s Opinion and where next - 10 November 2008
THE CENTRE WILL HOLD THE FIRST MONTHLY EVENT IN THE
2008 – 2009 EVENTS PROGRAMME ON MONDAY 10TH NOVEMBER.
Venue: Quadrant Chambers, 10 Fleet Street, London, EC4
Registration - 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Chairman:
Michael Howard QC – Quadrant Chambers
Panellists:
Steven Gee QC – Stone Chambers
David Joseph QC – Essex Court Chambers
The issue in Front Comor referred by the House of Lords to the ECJ
Is it consistent with EC Regulation 44/2001 for a court of a Member State to make an order to restrain a person commencing or continuing proceedings in another Member State on the ground that such proceedings are in breach of an arbitration agreement?
In the light of the opinion of the Advocate General in the Front Comor (delivered on 4th September 2008), the panel will discuss the issues involved and the possible repercussions on Arbitration generally if the European Court of Justice were to follow the Advocate General’s opinion.
For registration to attend this event, please contact the Centre at: shipping@ucl.ac.uk or by telephone: 020 7679 1512
|
Return to top
The Tenth Cadwallader Lecture -
Lawmaking and Implementation in International Shipping: Which Law do we obey? - 01 October 2008
The Centre is delighted to announce that this prominent Lecture took place on Wednesday 1st October at the IMO's Headquarters.
SUMMARY OF THE EVENT
When the law conflicts with the law, lawyers, courts and tribunals, have the formidable task of producing harmony from conflict. How to avoid or resolve conflict between regional and international legislation and promote harmonisation were the themes of this year’s Cadwallader Memorial Lecture of the London Shipping Law Centre, held fittingly at the IMO Headquarters in London on October 1st.
Conflict in laws is most likely to arise at an international level when nation states, regional groupings of states and other multistate organisations produce a range of acts and instruments which dovetail in some respects but not in others.
The problem presented, thereby, is especially marked in the shipping industry. Merchant vessels are often built, flagged, owned and operated by and from different countries. In the course of their working lives, they sail into the territorial waters and economic zones covered by a range of national, regional and international jurisdictions.
It is 60 years since the International Maritime Organization began – first in a consultative and later in a lawmaking role - the long haul of gaining agreement from disparate jurisdictions of its member states on rules, standards, procedures and conduct that would be accepted by the great majority of nations and international bodies - dealing with regulation pertaining to safe, secure and efficient shipping in clean oceans. This fundamental and indispensible role of the IMO was also celebrated at the 10th Cadwallader event
Dr Aleka Mandaraka-Sheppard
Inevitably, there will be some conflict of laws. Some are difficult to resolve, not least in the maritime world. The Founder and Director of the Centre, Dr Aleka Mandaraka Sheppard, Visiting Professor of Maritime law at UCL, posed a series of key questions arising from conflict to the 500 hundred delegates from the shipping industry and the legal and other marine professions:
Who should make the law in a complex, global industry and how should it be implemented effectively? Which law should apply when there is conflict between international treaties and regional laws? Which courts or tribunals would have competent jurisdiction to decide disputes? How should differences between court decisions be reconciled to enhance certainty in the law? Should there be a Supreme Court to decide definitively on disputes of conflict of laws when courts or tribunals get it wrong?
Dr Sheppard stressed the need for an agreed set of coherent rules applicable to cross-border international shipping and for harmonization of maritime law. “No one would dispute that legal certainty is essential to the delivery of justice…. but for legal rules to work, account had to be taken of the context in which they are implemented. For example, the EU Directive on ship-source pollution conflicts with the context of international law”. The difficulties created by this Directive, she continued, are compounded by the decision of the European Court of Justice which avoided answering the vital question whether or not the Directive is valid in relation to MARPOL, leaving national courts to interpret the Directive according to principles applicable by national rather than international law.
“Such law is hardly consistent with legal certainty, and it does not assist the development of coherent rules, since the EU members will, inevitably, be bound by two conflicting laws”, said Dr Sheppard. She urged close co-operation between regional legislators and the IMO for the exchange of knowledge in order to achieve uniformity of maritime law.
“Only then can the law be enforced consistently for ship safety and environmental protection as well as fair compensation to victims of accidents. Only then will we know which law should apply.” For Dr Mandaraka-Sheppard’s full address, click here: www.london-shipping-law.com
The dilemmas were aired and the issues tackled by Mrs. Birgit Solling Olsen, Deputy Director-General, Danish Maritime Authority; Dr Thomas A Mensah, former Presiding Judge, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea; and Sir Michael Wood, Senior Fellow at the Lauterpracht Centre for International Law, Cambridge University.
Dr Thomas Mensah
Dr Thomas Mensah explained that:
The rights of states over shipping in the various maritime zones may be exercised by individual states or regional or sub-regional groups of states to enforce rules and standards on maritime safety and prevention of marine pollution.
Such rights are always subject to limits and constraints imposed by international legal instruments or principles. A state seeking to implement its national laws against a foreign ship may be obliged to have due regard to its obligations vis á vis the ship or its owner or the personnel on board. These may arise under international law rules and regulations applicable to the state concerned in its relationships to the flag or other states. Where provisions or requirements in the laws of a state or a group of states conflict with those in an international instrument, the state or group of states may be unable to apply their law to the ship, or may have to modify its application to avoid violating the rights of other states.
There are bound to be cases in which the laws established by one law-maker conflict, or are not entirely compatible, with regulations or principles claimed by another to be equally applicable to the same ships or operations. Three issues may need to be resolved: whether the contending rules and principles are necessarily applicable to ship, person or incident; whether there is a conflict or incompatibility between the rules or principles involved; and, if so, which of the conflicting rules should be accorded priority in the circumstances. Would it be possible to adapt to permit the application of both rules or standards without necessarily creating a conflict? For Dr Mensah’s presentation, click here: www.london-shipping-law.com
Sir Michael Wood KCMG
Sir Michael Wood stressed that “You must obey all of the law, whatever legal system is applicable: domestic, EU and any public international law applicable directly or through one or more domestic legal systems. Where it is not possible to do so----and I believe such cases are likely to be rare----the problem has essentially to be solved through political channels”.
“In the modern international law of the sea, there had been a ‘proliferation’ of international courts and tribunals since the 1990s with jurisdiction over part of the law only. Some have predicted dire consequences to the coherence of the international legal system if international courts come to differing views about the law. They have argued that since there is no Supreme Court of international law, the law will be forever fractured. This concern has led some to propose that the International Court in The Hague should be given an appellate role. That is unrealistic and quite unnecessary as states are not going to agree”, he said.
The proliferation of international courts and tribunals had enhanced the opportunities for shipping interests to bring direct actions on the international plane. Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which now has 157 parties, including the EU, ship owners can seise the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Hamburg. For public international law of the sea, there is no such court, although decisions of the ICJ and of ITLOS are likely to be accorded great weight.
There is often no court with international jurisdiction and, even more frequently, no State willing to shoulder the burden of initiating legal proceedings against another State. The burden can be considerable in political and resources terms. International litigation can take a long time and, in the meantime, the problem remains unresolved.
If a court ‘gets it wrong,’ one can always try again to persuade the court (or sometimes another court) to rethink its position or distinguish the earlier case, narrowing its effects. It may be possible to change the legal position through legislation and, in the international system, through the adoption of a new convention. Such action requires political will, which is not always present.
There seems to be a tendency in Brussels to react, in haste and without much reflection, to the latest shipping disaster----to seize upon the latest incident to push through proposals that have been on the stocks for some time. There is a tendency to blame an ‘out-of date’ Law of the Sea Convention for failure to act ahead of time, to claim that all wisdom lies in Brussels and to have little regard to the rest of the world.
Ultimately, the Council of Ministers and, therefore, national governments approve proposals in this field. At that level, the pressures to maintain the basic framework of the international law of the sea are considerable. There may be different views among the 27 Member States as to what the international law of the sea requires. Not all are major shipping nations and their interests differ. On the whole, the EU has not done as badly as its reputation among law of the sea community would lead one to suppose.
A recurring theme in Brussels and at the IMO is the inadequacy and unevenness of enforcement, especially by some flag States. The problem seems pretty intractable. That lies behind many of the proposals for exorbitant port and coastal State jurisdiction. Another problem is the slowness of traditional procedures for the adoption and entry into force of international conventions, although IMO has pioneered tacit approval for amending conventions. It can be so much quicker to adopt Community legislation.
A third theme in Brussels is that the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, negotiated 30 years ago, is outmoded. However, the balances struck in the package deals of the 1970s have stood the test of time. They are flexible and open-ended, looking forward to the future development of international rules and standards. The rules in the Convention can be adjusted through new agreements and uniform practices. Moves to amend the Convention’s regime for shipping would be unlikely to succeed or to lead to a better regime. Unilateral attempts to change international law in this field are equally if not more hazardous. Sir Michael concluded that: “If Europe just does what seems good to Europe, we may quickly find other States and other regions taking action which seems good to them but which is gravely harmful to shipping around the world”. For Sir Michael’s presentation, please click here: : www.london-shipping-law.com
Mrs Birgit Solling Olsen
Mrs Birgit Solling-Olsen dealt with challenging issues confronting the IMO, including the problem of Unilateral or regional legislation.
The IMO’s role, she said, as a focal point of international rule setting is being challenged by regional organizations such as the European Community. The latest draft communication from the EC on strategic options for European Shipping and the European maritime transport system in the horizon 2008-2018, states: “To the extent that this is possible, all objectives of the EU maritime safety and security policies should be effectively reached by means of instruments agreed through IMO. However the EU and its Member States have to continue efforts in consolidating a global fair level playing field.
The answers to these challenges have to be agreed at IMO level in the form of appropriate regulatory measures, to be timely adopted and above all, properly enforced. Failure to do so would inevitably give rise to regional rules by the different parts in the world, to the disadvantage of the international system.”
Harmonised and globally applied international standards have also from time to time been challenged by states taking unilateral action, e.g. on pollution or liability. Protecting the environment will call for new and timely IMO measures. If IMO does not continue to act promptly on current issues such as reducing emissions from ships, it will become extremely difficult to ensure the necessary support for global rules and regional or national rules will prevail.
For an organization with more than 160 constituents, it is obviously a difficult task to ensure consensus on legislation, which will burden the industry or consumers with extra costs. It will be increasingly important to remind States that IMO was established to meet such needs and will have to react promptly.
She concluded by saying that there may be a need to adjust the entry into force provision. In a number of technical conventions a vast number of states are needed as well as a high percentage of tonnage. In striving for global acceptance, this sometimes forms a barrier for a more speedy entry into force. For Mrs Sølling Olsen’s address, click here: www.london-shipping-law.com
The debate was chaired by IMO Secretary-General Efthimios Mitropoulos.
He reminded his audience that today shipping is a safe and secure mode of transport----comparatively clean, environmentally friendly and very energy efficient. This reflected international co-operation over many years with IMO making an invaluable contribution.
“Decisions within the IMO are taken by consensus. If 51 per cent of nations vote for a measure and 49 per cent against it, it will not work. We have to have consensus. The shipping industry has no alternative to creating law at an international level. The international framework is now in place but it needs action at national level. States might start by adapting international legislation”.
“I am sure you all share my grave concern about piracy----the number of incidents and their ferocity. IMO has been very active. The UN Security Council did what we asked. UNCLOS allows the seizing of pirates, reflecting the principles of public international law”.
Overall, it became apparent - from the discussion at this event - that there are no immediate or satisfactory answers to the complex questions asked and it is therefore pertinent that maritime nations should be urged to take the necessary steps to implement the international conventions, thereby limiting conflict of laws, or preventing the necessity of regional legislation. For Mr Mitropoulos’s address, please click here: www.london-shipping-law.com
The Rt. Hon Lord Mustill
The President of the London Shipping Law Centre, Lord Mustill, expressed his profound congratulations to the Centre and to the IMO for joining forces to tackle such difficult but important questions with the industry.
This memorial lecture was set up in tribute to Professor Francis Cadwallader for his contribution to education and the development of maritime law.
It was generously sponsored by eminent figures of the shipping industry and the legal profession and included a special feature of Nautical themes played by a string quartet of the Oxford Philomusica sponsored by George Tsavliris. Lord Mustill, presented gifts to the Secretary General, Mr Mitropoulos, and to the Director of the Centre, Dr Aleka Mandaraka - Sheppard, on behalf of the Steering Committee of the Centre in recognition of their respective contribution to knowledge in maritime affairs and promotion of harmonized standards in international shipping. For the Vote of Thanks, Presentation of Gifts and Closing Remarks:www.london-shipping-law.com
For a full version of the discussion and papers, please see below.
The Key Note Address delivered by Dr Aleka Mandaraka-Sheppard: www.london-shipping-law.com
The Chairman - Mr Efthimios Mitropoulos's Opening Remarks: www.london-shipping-law.com
The presentation by Solling Olsen: www.london-shipping-law.com
The presentation by Dr Thomas Mensah: www.london-shipping-law.com
The presentation by Sir Michael Wood KCMG: www.london-shipping-law.com
The Forum/Panel Discussion: www.london-shipping-law.com
Vote of Thanks, Presentation of Gifts and Closing Remarkswww.london-shipping-law.com
Please click on the image below to view our full brochure.
<
The full transcript of the Lecture and photos from the event will be made available on-line in due course. |
Return to top
Professional Indemnity Insurance in the Maritime Industry - 18 June 2008
Issues:
Insurance Cover:
• Who needs it and who is covered?
• For what risks?
• English court decisions
• Possible contractual pitfalls
•What are the reasonable expectations an insured can have of his liability insurer?
• Ship management: too much maintenance to do and too little income to do it with; how can the gap be bridged?
• Solutions and market position
• the move to transfer responsibility to the intermediary for the failure of the commercial bargain between the parties for whom the intermediaries were acting.
• the changing face of litigation against intermediaries both in respect of claims brought under the traditional heading of breach of duty and in respect of claims which might arise under the increasing regulatory regimes
Chair: David Martin-Clark – Stone Chambers/LSLC
Panellists:
Nigel Cooper – Quadrant Chambers
Presentation - Fine dining or just another meal ticket - pursuit of the intermediary
Andrew Jamieson – ITIC
Presentation - Service not included - the role and limits of insurance.
David Blackburn – Miller Insurance Ltd.
Presentation – Intermediaries - The Meat in the Sandwich
Wednesday 18th June 2008, 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Venue: Quadrant Chambers, 10 Fleet Street, London, EC4
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points by the Law Society and the Bar Standards Board
|
Return to top
Shipping loans and mortgages: enforcement issues - 28 May 2008
Introduction:
• Origins - the laws of Oleron
• Growth of the modern ship mortgage regime
• Intertwined security interests
• Ship mortgage recognition
• Ability to remove or reduce country risk issue
• Is the lender completely secured against owner insolvency?
Issues:
• Variation of liens in different jurisdictions;
• Rights of cargo owners when a ship is arrested;
• The banker’s perspective
• Is there a choice for the arresting mortgagee and how and why does it exercise that choice?
Chair: Struan Robertson – Clarksons
Panellists:
Andy Longhurst – Lloyds TSB Bank
Duncan Mc Donald – Stephenson Harwood
Graeme Bowtle – Consultant, Steele Raymond LLP
Venue: Stephenson Harwood, One St Paul’s Churchyard, London, EC4
The event is accredited for 2 CPD points
|
Return to top
The LSLC Maritime Industry Course - 01 May 2008
LSLC’s new initiative
In-keeping with the Centre’s mission to provide continuing and high quality education to the various sectors of the shipping industry, the course has been tailor-made to suit the needs of both legally and non-legally qualified professionals wishing to gain a comprehensive understanding of the legal, commercial and technical aspects of the shipping business.
Comprising an initial Foundation course and two advanced courses, it is modular in construction, spread over three weeks of full-time attendance spaced over an eight month period to suit the needs of working professionals.
The thrust of the course lies in the practical workshops and stimulating interactive lectures with the support of audio-visual aids. The course has been especially written and developed for delegates wishing to acquire knowledge of shipping law, its use and applicability to their day to day undertakings.
For further information about the Course, please click link and The LSLC Maritime Industry Course Flyer
|
Return to top
“Draft Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea” - 30 April 2008
Introduction
The final text of a new prospective Convention on the carriage of goods has been recently agreed in Vienna. It will be discussed, and almost certainly adopted, by the UNCITRAL Commission at its meeting in New York in June 2008. After that it will be adopted by the General Assembly of the UN and be open for signature in 2009.
It raises immediate topical questions, both political and legal. Will it be ratified by the US, who have been pressing for a new sea carriage convention and have obtained
concessions? Would the rest of the world follow? Would the replacement of the Hague Visby Rules and the Hamburg Rules ( together with national Bill of Lading statutes) by a totally new and untried text be a step forwards or backwards?
Issues to be discussed include:
• “Door-to door” coverage. Interplay with CMR, COTIF, Warsaw and national statutes. Application to “roll-on, roll-off” and non “mode-specific” transport.
• The increase in carriers’ liabilities
• “Volume contracts”; their effect legally and commercially
• Transport documents; new terminology; new categories; delivery without surrender of bills of lading.
Chairman:
Anthony Diamond QC – Essex Court Chambers
Panellists:
Kaare Christoffersen - A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S
Dr Beate Czerwenka - Federal Ministry of Justice (Berlin)
Prof. Francis Reynolds Q.C. (Hon.) – Univ. of Oxford / 7 King’s Bench Walk
Chris Welsh – European Shippers’ Council / Freight Transport Association
Wednesday 30th April 2008, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Barlow Lyde & Gilbert, Beaufort House, St Botolph Street, London, EC3
|
Return to top
Corporate Manslaughter and Personal Injury in the Maritime Context - 12 March 2008
The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 comes into force on 6th April 2008 and will apply to all body corporates.
A conviction under the Act as a result of gross negligence of senior management can lead to unlimited fines, publicity and remedial orders. The Act applies to UK flag Vessels and all Vessels in UK waters.
This seminar examines the scope of the Act, the threshold for a conviction, the effect of such proceedings upon insurance and limitation and personal injury claims.
It also contrasts these issues with the US experience to put the Act into context.
Chairman: The Right. Hon. Sir Anthony Clarke MR
Panellists:
Nicholas Purnell QC – Cloth Fair Chambers
Maria Pittordis - Hill Dickinson
Rhys Clift – Hill Dickinson
Christopher Brown – Thomas Miller
John Keller,III - Keller Bolz
Wednesday 12th March 2008, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Hill Dickinson, Irongate House, Duke’s Place, London
This event is accredited for 2CPD points.
|
Return to top
Recent lectures given by the LSLC Director - 05 March 2008
Recent lectures given by the Director on topical issues:
1. To LSLC members: Law on late redelivery revisited, click link. The author awaits with interest the decision of the current appeal to the House of Lords in the case of The Achilleas.
2. To the LLM Maritime Law Students of the University of Southampton: Employment and Indemnity under Time Charter Parties, click link. |
Return to top
Kompetenz-Kompetenz in Arbitration - 27 February 2008
Introduction:
Questions of arbitral jurisdiction occur frequently in practice. Parties involved in international trade and their lawyers are often embroiled in jurisdictional disputes which increase the legal costs of the parties involved, cause delay, and can affect enforcement of an award. A frequent and important issue is when jurisdiction is to be decided and by whom. The doctrine of Kompetenz-Kompetenz has been adopted in the Arbitration Act 1996 and has revolutionised how jurisdictional issues are to be determined. Certainty in this area is elusive because there are different approaches to the doctrine by the national laws of different states. If a legal system allows the arbitration to proceed in the face of a jurisdictional challenge - when, for example, the validity or scope of the arbitration agreement is questioned - the story could unfold in several ways.
In this seminar, our panellists will examine how Kompetenz-Kompetenz is treated in different jurisdictions.
Issues:
• How is the doctrine of Kompetenz – Kompetenz understood and applied in different jurisdictions?
• Interaction of the separability doctrine with Kompetenz-Kompetenz
• Anti-suit injunctions and the doctrine of Kompetenz - Kompetenz
• What are the powers of the arbitral tribunal and the court?
Chair: The Rt. Hon. Lord Mustill
Panellists:
Steven Gee QC – Stone Chambers
Sarah Francois-Ponchet – Salans (Paris)
Steve Finizio – WilmerHale
Dr Sebastian Besson - Python & Peter (Geneva)
Wednesday 27th February 2008, 5.30pm for 6.00pm
Venue: Clyde & Co., 51 Eastcheap, London, EC3
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points |
Return to top
THE SECOND EDITION OF MODERN MARITIME LAW AND RISK MANAGEMENT - 19 January 2008
The second edition of Modern Maritime Law and Risk Management written by Dr Aleka Mandaraka-Sheppard has just been published by Routledge.Cavendish. Renowned for its first edition, the book has been extensively revised to bring it into line with new trends and perspectives.
For further details re content and availability see –
The Second Edition of Modern Maritime Law and Risk Management
|
Return to top
What makes a good arbitration? Wednesday 16th January 2008 - 16 January 2008
Introduction
Given London’s prominent position in Arbitration and the gradual rise of other arbitration centres, it is within LSLC’s remit to seek the exchange of views between the users of arbitration and arbitrators themselves for the purpose of (a) furthering the knowledge of all participants and (b) ensuring that learning from such meetings will maintain the high standards of London Arbitration.
Issues for discussion:
• The pros and cons of arbitrating under the auspices and rules of institutions such as the ICC, LCIA or LMAA
• The standards to be applied during Interlocutories, the hearings and to writing awards
• Are there different standards in Small Claims Procedure cases?
• Benchmarking the basic qualities of a good Arbitrator
• Feedback on the performance of arbitrators and Arbitrator selection
• The level of costs and arbitrators’ fees
Chair: Kenneth Rokison QC - 20 Essex Street
Panellists:
Michael Baker – Harber - London Maritime Arbitrators Association
Nicola Cox - West of England Insurances Services
John Merrett - ICC Court of International Arbitration
Adrian Winstanley – London Court of Int. Arbitration
Wednesday 16th January 2008, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Lawrence Graham,
4 More London Riverside,
London, SE1
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points
|
Return to top
Brokers under pressure? Insurance Law and Insurance Brokers 5th December 2007 - 05 December 2007
Introduction
Insurance brokers are a vital feature of every insurance transaction. It is this unique position which has potentially exposed brokers to extended obligations and anomalies under the law. The broker’s position has become more uncertain and complex following proposals of the Law Commission and the activities of the FSA and the European Commission. This event will consider some aspects of the environment in which brokers operate.
Issues to be discussed:
• Are the courts extending common law duties of care?
• Disclosure and section 19 of Marine Insurance Act 1906
• The regulatory environment
Panellists:
Ben Ogden – Ince & Co
Peter MacDonald Eggers – 7 King’s Bench Walk
Michele Pullan – Head of Legal, Marsh
Chairman: The Right. Hon. Lord Mance
Wednesday 5th December 2007, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Ince & Co., International House, 1 St. Katherine’s Way, London, E1
The event is accredited for 2 CPD points
|
Return to top
Shipping Tomorrow - Thursday 29th November 2007 - 29 November 2007
The Centre, in conjunction with the British Chamber of Commerce in Germany and Ince & Co., presents Shipping Tomorrow, a very informative three panel event dealing with topical aspects of insurance, ship finance and the growth of the mega-containership market with its attendant economic and practical ramifications.
Ship Finance
• An analysis of the strengths of the German ship finance industry compared to the UK
•Public/private equity - a transatlantic perspective
Insurance
• Considering the immense values of hull and cargo at risk nowadays, what is the forecast of insurance capacity?
• Examples of losses that might exceed insurance capacity
• How does that affect premiums and worldwide markets?
• What are the current trends, or what the future might be, in the choice of markets by assureds?
• What underwriters are looking for and how they choose their assured?
• What precautions are they taking in the management of their own risks?
• Do they impose the condition of risk management upon their potential or current assureds to prevent catastrophic losses?
• If yes, how do they do that? What clauses do they normally negotiate with assureds to be included in the contract?
Mega-containerships
From the point of view of the container liner operator:
• Do the savings in the long haul hub-to-hub route outweigh the additional costs to be incurred in more extensive feeder operations?
• How will shippers react to the diminution in direct port calls?
From the point of view of the terminal operator:
• Is it possible physically to accommodate these big ships?
• What investment in dredging and craneage will be needed?
• What guarantee is available from the customer lines that, if these investments are made, they will continue to use the port?
A naval architect’s perspective will also be included.
The event provides an excellent opportunity to obtain expert knowledge from our panel of professionals. For further details, click on the link:
Click here
To book a place, please use the Booking Form in the linked document or contact the Centre at: shipping@ucl.ac.uk
This event is accredited for 3 CPD points
|
Return to top
Time Charters – Hot Topics - Wednesday 21st November 2007 - 21 November 2007
Issues arising from The ‘Achilleas’, The ‘Flintermar’, and The ‘Aconcagua’ (CSAV –v- Hamburg)
• Is it commercially reasonable that if time-charterers redeliver late, owners are able to recover for the loss of a following fixture?
• Is The ‘Achilleas’ bad law? Did the law take a wrong turning in holding that, if a legitimate last voyage overruns, charterers are in breach of contract and liable for damages limited only by ‘remoteness’?
• Is there any single formula which will allocate responsibility for all claims arising from port operations?
• How should the law tell what are owners’ functions and what are charterers’ functions?
• Does the ‘rule’ that clause 8 of the NYPE allocates responsibility to charterers, unless the vessel ‘officiously intervenes’ or there are matters known only to the vessel, fit the practical realities of loading and stowing cargo?
•Is this ‘rule’ good law? Is owners’ duty to make the vessel seaworthy only ‘non-delegable’ or actually non-delegable?
Panellists:
Simon Kverndal QC – Quadrant Chambers
Dr. Aleka Sheppard – London Shipping Law Centre, ORA-MRM
Jeremy Russell QC – Quadrant Chambers
Robert Gay – Hill Dickinson LLP
Chairman: Timothy Young QC – 20 Essex Street
Wednesday 21st November 2007, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: A. Bilbrough & Co. Ltd., 50 Leman Street, London, E1
The event is accredited for 2 CPD points
|
Return to top
The Sea Angel - 31 October 2007
Wednesday 31st October 2007
Introduction
On 27 July 2003, the tanker “TASMAN SPIRIT” grounded near the approaches to the port of Karachi giving rise to a major pollution incident. During the salvage operation that followed, Tsavliris chartered in the “SEA ANGEL” for a period of “up to 20 days” to assist in the transhipment of oil off the casualty. Unfortunately, once the transhipment operation had been completed, the Karachi Port Trust refused to permit the “SEA ANGEL” (and others) to leave port. The “SEA ANGEL” was detained at Karachi until 26 December 2003 and was only finally redelivered by Tsavliris on 1 January 2004.
A dispute arose between Tsavliris and the owners of the “SEA ANGEL” as to unpaid hire, and the critical question became: “had the time charter been frustrated?” Both the Commercial Court and the Court of Appeal held that it had not – a decision of importance in the law of frustration as whole, and in particular to those operating in the salvage arena.
Issues to be discussed include:
• What the Courts decided in the “SEA ANGEL” case
• The case’s importance to the doctrine of frustration
• Food for thought – some loose ends?
• The “SEA ANGEL” and the implications for insurers in commercial disputes
• The impact of the case on detention in the salvage industry
Chairman:
The Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Rix
Panellists:
Elizabeth Blackburn QC – Stone Chambers
John Reeder QC - Stone Chambers
Eamon Moloney – Eversheds
Mark Jones – Stone Chambers
Wednesday 31st October 2007, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Eversheds, Senator House, 85 Queen Victoria Street, London, EC4
|
Return to top
The Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention - 03 October 2007
Introduction
The Convention, which was finalised at a diplomatic conference in Nairobi in May this year, will extend the authority of participating States to call for the removal of a wreck, or any wreckage from a ship, to the EEZ of that State whenever there is a danger or impediment to navigation or a threat that may reasonably be expected to result in a major harmful consequences to the marine environment or related interests of those States. It also gives participating States, without prejudice to their existing laws, the option to extend its provisions, which include the maintenance of compulsory insurance and a right of direct action against the insurer, to its own territorial waters. It will enter into force 12 months after the ratification of 10 States.
Issues to be discussed include:
• Is the Convention likely to be ratified. If so, are many States likely to extend its provisions to their territorial waters.
• What, if any, problems are foreseen.
• Is the UK likely to ratify and adopt it to its territorial waters. How will that effect existing laws. Is SOSREP likely to be involved.
• What are the views of ship owners, P&I insurers and salvors.
Panellists:
Richard Shaw – Univ. of Southampton, Institute of Maritime Law
David Bolomini – Department for Transport
Kiran Khosla - International Chamber of Shipping
David Baker – International Group of P & I Clubs
Chairman:
Archie Bishop – Holman Fenwick & Willan/Int. Salvage Union
Wednesday 3rd October 2007, 5.30 for 6.00pm
Venue: Holman Fenwick & Willan, Marlow House, Lloyds Avenue, London, EC3
This event is accredited for 2 CPD points
|
Return to top
|
|
