The Inter-Club Agreement (ICA) was formulated in in order to promote amicable and equitable settlements for cargo claims under the. The Inter-Club Agreement (ICA) first came into force on 20 February It was revised in , in. and again in See 24 August , Standard. CIRCULAR REF: / CIRCULATED TO ALL MEMBERS, BROKERS AND DIRECTORS. The Inter-Club New York Produce Exchange Agreement, which.
|Published (Last):||23 May 2009|
|PDF File Size:||18.12 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.16 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Group has therefore taken a decision to incorporate a new provision into the Agreement, which creates an entitlement to security on the basis of reciprocity, once one of the parties to a charterparty has put up security in respect of a Cargo Claim, provided that the time limits set out in clause 6 of the Agreement have been complied with the Security Provision. All other claims whatsoever including claims for delay to cargo where there is irrefutable evidence that the claim arose interculb of the act or neglect of Charterers, their servants or sub-contractors.
Accordingly, the above-mentioned items would be considered as set out in Table II. In a claim to which Hague or Hague-Visby Rules apply, cargo claimants should be defeated by the contractual carrier under the contract of carriage, if the claim arises by virtue of negligent navigation or management and so there should be no claim to pass on under the ICA. After the expiry agreemejt such notice, the Agreement shall nevertheless continue as between all the Clubs, other than the Club giving such notice who shall remain bound by and be entitled to the benefit of this Agreement in respect of all cargo claims arising out of charterparties commenced prior to the expiration of such notice.
The first in was to meet one particular shortcoming relating to the time limit for making claims. Inter-Club Agreement as amended 1 September The ICA, since its inception, has been amended on two occasions.
If the condensation damage resulted solely from improper ventilation, owners were per cent liable. As will be seen, it has also been necessary to make a number of additional consequential but not substantive amendments to the Agreement.
A cargo claim was made against the vessel. An ex-gratia payment made where no legal liability exists cannot be a claim properly settled or compromised.
Loss of cargo; damage to cargo; shortage of cargo incl. Condensation resulting from bad stowage where the words “and responsibility” have not been added to Clause 8. Instead, an alternative apportionment formula is to be applied. The Clubs will recommend to their Members without qualification that their Members adopt this Agreement for the purpose of apportioning liability for claims in respect of cargo which arise under, out of or in connection with all charterparties on the New York Produce Exchange Form or or Asbatime Form or any subsequent amendment of such formswhether or not this Agreement has been incorporated into such charterparties.
Since stowage of the cargo inside the container takes place ashore, the cause of the loss or damage will intercclub taken place prior to the container being loaded onto the vessel and therefore any claim arising therefrom should fall outside the ambit of the ICA. Clause 8 d of the ICA provides that: Both the ICA and the Agreement have worked well, been widely adopted by the maritime industry and have achieved their purpose.
These clauses seem to have fallen into disuse and therefore it is believed that the minor change will be of little or no practical significance. As the new agreement takes effect from 1st Septemberwe recommend its incorporation into all NYPE and Asbatime charterparties going forward.
You are currently offline. If the contractual carrier pays the claim in any event, the claim will not have been properly settled and therefore no recovery can agfeement made under the ICA. In fact the change is more subtle than mere semantics. He has been involved in a number of high-value, complex and. The Agreement also provides that apportionment under the ICA may only be made if the claim has been properly settled or compromised.
In particular, it is agreed solely for the purposes of this Agreement: Governing Law 9 This Agreement shall be subject to Agrerment Law and Jurisdiction, unless it is incorporated into the charterparty or the settlement of claims in respect of cargo under the charterparty is inherclub subject to this Agreementin which case it shall be subject to the law and jurisdiction provisions governing the charterparty.
Due to not having been paid for the cargo, the charterers iinterclub the vessel to wait off the discharge port for over 4 months.
As can be seen, despite the absence of any express reference to condensation claims, it is believed that these claims will continue to be treated in the same way as before. This means that the simple fact that the underlying contract of carriage is a contract for through or multimodal transport is not a reason in itself to avoid application of the Agreement, even if this type of contract is not authorised under the charterparty.
It would seem that the phrase means stowage of the container on board the chartered vessel. Under the Agreement, written notification of a claim must be given to the other party within 24 months of the date of delivery of the cargo or the date the cargo should have been delivered, except for where the Hamburg Rules are compulsorily applicable, in which case the time limit is 36 months from the date of delivery.
Interpretation of the Inter-Club Agreement – Thomas Cooper LLP
That claim was settled and the owners then brought a recourse action against charterers under the terms of the time charterparty. As a result, the new form says clearly that the addition of the words “and responsibility” in Clause 8 is not a material amendment even though the inclusion of such words will affect the manner in which liability is 196 – see comments to “Apportionments” belowbut that the addition of the words “cargo claims” to Clause 26 renders the Agreement inoperative even if it is expressly incorporated into the charterparty.
Industry newsPress releases. Niterclub Bar 6 Recovery under this Agreement by an Owner or Charterer shall be deemed to be waived and absolutely agreenent unless written notification of the cargo claim has been given to the other party to the charterparty within 24 months of the date of delivery of the cargo or the date the cargo should have been delivered, save that, where the Hamburg Rules or any national legislation giving effect thereto are compulsorily applicable by operation of law to the contract of carriage or to that part of the transit that comprised carriage on the chartered vessel, the period shall be 36 months.
The apportionment of liability under the two versions of the ICA will be very similar, with some minor exceptions where no provision for apportionment existed in the version and the inclusion of the “catch-all” provision. In addition, there is now a new requirement that the cargo claim must also be paid.
Inter-Club Agreement – Comparison Between 1984 and 1996 Forms
The ICA endeavours to remove the contradiction contained in the formula. From time to time the Agreement has been amended in niterclub to keep it in line with legal developments. Apportionment under each form should be as per Table IV, based on English law.
However, as we describe below, for claims arising from cargo handling the apportionment formula maintains a distinction between cases in which Clause 8 has been amended to include the words “and responsibility” or has otherwise been amended to make the Master responsible for cargo handling and those cases in which Clause 8 has no such amendment.
The apportionment 7 The amount of any cargo claim to be apportioned under this Agreement shall be the amount in fact borne by the party to the charterparty seeking apportionment, regardless of whether that claim may be or has been apportioned by application zgreement this Agreement agreementt another charterparty.
One for claims where Clause 8 of the charterparty contained no material amendments and one for claims where the only material amendment was the inclusion of the words “and responsibility” or similar words, by which the Master was made responsible for cargo handling. The Agreement has now been amended once again in order to overcome some of the effects of the above-mentioned decision, as iterclub as to adapt it to the carriage of containerised cargo, and to deal with other issues which have given rise to disputes over the years.
Claims in fact arising out of error or fault in navigation or management of the vessel, are to be apportioned per cent to owners. This was implied in the form.
The rationale behind this is that many charterparties incorporate the Hague or Hague-Visby Rules thus giving owners a complete defence to claims of this kind. As explained above, by virtue of Clause 4 a iiithe ICA only applies where charterers can show the loss, damage, shortage, overcarriage or delay occurred lnterclub commencement of the loading of the cargo onto the chartered vessel and prior to completion of discharge from that vessel.
Clause 8 d of the ICA provides that:. Industry News Up-to-date information about topical issues is provided by the Industry News service.
Inter-Club Agreement (as amended 1 September 2011)
All other claims whatsoever including claims for delay to cargo where there is irrefutable evidence that the claim arose out of the act or negligence of Owners, their servants or sub-contractors. It was common ground that liability as between owners and charterers for the cargo claim was to be apportioned in accordance with clause 8 d of the ICA which had been incorporated into the charter.
It took the form of re-arranging the text in a more logical way and:. Some of these amendments may introduce changes to the manner in which liability for cargo claims is apportioned between owners and charterers.