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

International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

International Marine Claims

Conference Dublin October 2005

Salvage Session – SCOPIC

Chris BeesleyInce & Co, London

Page 2: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

CASE STUDY 1Large bulk carrier with major structural damage deep sea.SCOPIC invoked immediately.Long services.Salved values: US$26 millionSCOPIC costs: US$20 millionArticle 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.

Page 3: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

CASE STUDY 2Small loaded container ship with heavy damage.SCOPIC invoked immediately.Long services.Salved values: US$7 millionSCOPIC costs: US$3 millionArticle 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:

Page 4: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

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?

Page 5: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

CASE STUDY 3Small 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

Page 6: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

CASE STUDY 4Chip 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

withoutcomplete 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

Page 7: International Marine Claims Conference Dublin October2005 Salvage Session – SCOPIC Chris Beesley Ince & Co, London

International Marine Claims

Conference Dublin October 2005

Salvage Session – SCOPIC

Chris BeesleyInce & Co, London