Salvage claim upheld in tug and tanker dispute

28 Feb 2025Court Report

The High Court upheld a salvage claim by the tug VB Rebel against the tanker MV Stela

High Court rules on salvage claim involving tug and tanker

The High Court of Justice, Admiralty Court, delivered a significant ruling on 27 February 2025, upholding a salvage claim by SD Rebel BV, the owners of the tug VB Rebel, and its crew against Elise Tankschiffahrt KG, the owners of the tanker MV Stela. The case was presided over by Admiralty Registrar Davison.

The dispute arose from an incident on 14 November 2023, when the VB Rebel provided salvage services to the MV Stela at Scheurhaven, part of the Port of Rotterdam. The services were rendered after the Stela ran aground, and a 'Certificate of Safe Delivery' was signed by the Master of the Stela, agreeing that any disputes would be settled in London under English law.

Despite this agreement, Elise Tankschiffahrt KG initiated proceedings in the Rotterdam District Court, challenging the nature of the services as salvage. The claimants responded by seeking an anti-suit injunction in the UK, which was granted by Andrew Baker J in March 2024, ordering the defendant to cease proceedings in the Netherlands.

The defendant, however, continued its case in the Netherlands, leading to parallel proceedings. The Rotterdam court declared its competence to adjudicate the claim, arguing that the jurisdiction agreement was too vague.

In the UK proceedings, the defendant did not appear at the final hearing. The court proceeded in their absence, considering evidence from both parties. The court found that the services rendered by the VB Rebel constituted salvage, as the Stela was in a position of real and sensible danger.

The court awarded the claimants £90,000, attributing £69,039 to the defendant, reflecting the salved value of the vessel and the professional nature of the salvage operation. The award was made in line with the Salvage Convention, which aims to encourage salvage operations.

The judgment also addressed the breach of the anti-suit injunction, awarding the claimants damages for costs incurred in defending the Dutch proceedings. The court reaffirmed the enforceability of the jurisdiction agreement, dismissing the defendant's claims of non est factum and uncertainty.

This case underscores the importance of jurisdiction agreements in maritime contracts and the court's role in upholding such agreements to prevent parallel proceedings.