Smit Salvage BV & Ors v Luster Maritime SA & Anor
[2023] EWHC 697 (Admlty)
Boluda Towage Rotterdam BV & Ors v Elise Tanschiffahrt KG & Anor
21 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 1329 (Admlty)
High Court
A tug helped a grounded tanker. A document said any disputes would be settled in an English court. The tanker's owners started a case in a Dutch court. The English court said the English document was binding on the tanker owners, so the case in the Dutch court was stopped, for now, until the English court decided who was right.
Key Facts
- •Tug VB Rebel assisted the grounded tanker m.t. Stela.
- •Masters of both vessels signed a Certificate of Safe Delivery specifying English law and jurisdiction for disputes.
- •Defendants challenged jurisdiction and sought a stay of proceedings.
- •Claimants sought an anti-suit injunction to prevent Dutch proceedings.
- •Dutch proceedings initiated by the owner and charterer of Stela against Boluda and Rebel, claiming no salvage was necessary.
Legal Principles
Forum non conveniens
Implicit in the defendants' application for a stay of proceedings.
Jurisdiction clauses in salvage agreements
Case law regarding the binding effect of jurisdiction clauses on parties to a contract, and potentially others.
Anti-suit injunctions
Donohue v Armco Inc & Others [2001] UKHL 64 (mentioned for comparison).
Non est factum and unilateral mistake
Defendants' potential defense regarding the signing of the Certificate of Safe Delivery.
Outcomes
Proceedings set aside for claims by Boluda and against the charterer.
No basis for jurisdiction over claims by Boluda or against the charterer as they were not bound by the jurisdiction clause.
Stay application dismissed for Rebel and crew's claims against the owner.
English court is the more appropriate forum for a dispute governed by an English law and jurisdiction clause. The Dutch court is not the appropriate forum to determine the validity of the governing law and jurisdiction clause.
Interim anti-suit injunction granted to restrain the owner from further pursuing Dutch proceedings against Rebel.
To prevent vexatious and oppressive duplicity of litigation, given the high probability that the dispute is governed by English law.
Similar Cases
SY RORO 1 PTE Limited & Anor v Onorato Armatori SRL & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1283 (Comm)
Ceto Shipping Corporation v Savory Shipping Inc
[2024] EWHC 663 (Comm)
Maersk Guiné-Bissau SARL & Anor v Almar-Hum Bubacar Baldé SARL
[2024] EWHC 993 (Comm)
Yangtze Navigation (Asia) Co Limited & Anor v TPT Shipping Limited & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2371 (Comm)