You are on page 1of 2

Liability for Stevedore Damage Clause

1.1 The allocation of responsibility in C/P:


It is the vessel owners, who, under common law, are obliged to load, stow, trim and
discharge the cargo. That means that responsibility for losses caused by the negligence
of stevedores remains with the owners. The owners can escape this liability only by
proving that the charterers, on their part, acted in such a way as to break the chain of
causation (i.e. interfering actively with the stevedoring operations) and with this
intervention from charterers being the immediate and proximate cause of the loss.
Consequently, owners will endeavor to include a clause in the C/P where these
obligations are transferred to the charterers. On their side, the charterers will of course
endeavor to have the responsibility for stevedore operations remain with the owners
even if charterers do accept responsibility for arranging and paying the stevedores.
Arranging and paying for stevedores will usually not mean that responsibility for the
operations as such are transferred to charterers.
In a recent London arbitration case (2015) 926 LMLN 4, the arbitrators examined
a stevedore damage clause which required the charterers to be notified of any damage
caused, within 24 hours of it being discovered.
In the arbitration the vessel had been on charter to both owners and sub
charterers. The relevant charter incorporated clauses which provided as follows:
Stevedore Clause

Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, the Charterers shall be liable
to the Owners for all damage to the vessel caused by Stevedores (Stevedore
Damages) and for losses, damages and expenses suffered by the Owners as a
consequence of Stevedore Damage provided that the Master has notified the Charterers
and/or their agents in writing within 24 hours following discovery
Such notice to specify Stevedore Damage in detail and to invite Charterers to appoint a
surveyor to assess the extent of the Stevedore Damage
The owners of the ship complained to the disponent owners that damage has been
caused to the vessel when it had loaded and discharged a cargo of logs, which were
carried from New Zealand to China. The owners of the ship brought a claim against their
disponent owners who in turn sought to pass it to the sub charterers.
The charterers relied upon clause 64 of the charter party. They argued that under it the
owners were obliged to notify them within 24 hours of loading or discharging, of a
stevedore damage incident. In addition, the notification notice was required to be
detailed and to contain details of the alleged damage. The charterers claimed no such
notice had been received or if notice had been given, it did not contain enough
information.
The tribunal decided that the charterers were taking clause 64 at face value and had
given no effect in their views to the fact that the Protective Clause had specifically

referred to logs. That clause had to take precedence over the time limit and other
obligations in clause 64. Under that clause, they had agreed to be liable for any
consequences due to stevedores rough operation and were obliged to repair or
reimburse The tribunals view was based on a particular set of clauses and facts but,
the decision might be an indicator of the way these issues will be handled where there
are competing clauses.

You might also like