Tanga Pharmaceuticals Plastics Limited and others vs Emirates Shipping Line FZE

28 Feb 2025Court Report

High Court dismisses summary judgment application in a shipping dispute over time-barred claims

High Court rules on time-barred claims in shipping dispute

The High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Commercial Court, delivered a significant ruling in the case of Tanga Pharmaceuticals Plastics Limited and others vs Emirates Shipping Line FZE. The judgment, handed down by Mr Justice Bright, addressed the application of the Defendant for summary judgment on the basis that the Claimants' claims were time-barred.

The dispute arose from the shipment of 548 containers of cargo aboard the MV 'Alion', which encountered a motor engine failure off the coast of Salalah in September 2021. The Defendant, Emirates Shipping Line FZE, was the carrier under the applicable bills of lading, which were governed by English law and subject to English jurisdiction.

The Claimants sought indemnity under the contract of carriage for their liability to salvors and for particular average, following the salvage operation conducted by Tsaviliris Salvage International. The Defendant argued that the claims were time-barred under the terms of the bills of lading, which included a 20-day provision for submitting claims and a service provision requiring jurisdiction to be obtained within a specified time.

Mr Justice Bright concluded that the incorporation of the Hague Rules in the bills of lading was not overridden by the provisions in clause 18 of the bills, which included the 20-day and service provisions. The judge emphasised that the 'Clause Paramount' in the bills of lading indicated that the Hague Rules should prevail over any inconsistent provisions.

The judgment clarified that the Hague Rules' Article III Rule 6, which provides a one-year limitation period for bringing claims, applied in this case. The Claimants had issued their claim form within this period, and therefore, their claims were not time-barred.

Furthermore, the court found that the service provision in clause 18, which required service of process within the limitation period, was incompatible with the Hague Rules when considered alongside the express choice of English law and jurisdiction in the bills of lading.

This ruling holds significant implications for practitioners dealing with shipping disputes and the interpretation of time-bar provisions in contracts of carriage. It underscores the importance of the Hague Rules in determining the limitation periods applicable to claims arising from the carriage of goods by sea.