Compania de Naveira Nedelka Sa V Tradex Internacional Sa

COMPANIA DE NAVEIRA NEDELKA SA V TRADEX INTERNACIONAL SA
(THE TRES FLORES)
I. Facts of the Case

 On, October 27, 1970, the owners, Compania de Naviera Nedelka S.A. of Panama.
chartered their steamship ‘Tres Flores’to load a cargo of maize.
 Clause 6 stated that “ before giving NOR the master has to take required measures to
keep the grain clean, dry and without smell.
 Clause 21 provided that at "loading port, time to commence, whether vessel be in
berth or not, whether in free pratique or not, whether in port or not, at 2 p.m. if written
notice is given during usual office hours before noon... Master is allowed to give the
notice of load readiness... when ship is arrived on the road of loading port1."
 On 11.02.1970 Sunday at 5:00 Hours the vessel arrived at Varna, at that time berth
was not available so the ship was anchored in the roads.
 At 10.00 the master gave notice of readiness that the ship was ready to load a
complete cargo of maize in accordance with the charterparty. 6500 tons of maize was
ready to be unloaded, but due to bad weather the ship was still in the roads and the
inspectors did not ispect it.
 After inspection it came to the notice that there were lot of pests and there is a need
for fumigation before loading. It took 4.5 hours to finish fumigation.
 On December 1 the charterers accepted the notice of readiness but no berth was
available until 7 of December.
 Loading was completed on December 13. The total demurrage originally claimed was
equivalent to $7,698.50 net, of which the charterers admitted to, and paid, $2,124.28.
II. Issues/ Questions of Law

 (1)Laytime commenced at 14.00 hours on Monday, November 23, or
laytime commenced at 14.00 hours on Tuesday, December 1.
 (2)whether the owners were entitled to damages for detention on account of delay by
the charterers in inspecting the vessel, if the answer is 14:00 hours on 1 Dec.
1
Clause 21.
III. Arguments by the Owners
 That the “question of readiness is relative, to be assessed by what is expected of her

when at the moment under the charterparty she is geographically qualified to give her
notice of readiness.”
IV. Arguments by the Charterers

 laytime for loading cannot commence until (a) the vessel has geographically arrived;
(b) the vessel is ready to load; (c) notice of readiness has been given. Both at common
law and by this charterparty (b) must precede (c). An effective notice of readiness
cannot be given unless there is readiness to load.
V. Judgment and Ratio
A. LORD DENNING M.R.

In order for a notice of readiness to be good, the vessel must be ready at the time that the
notice is given, and not at a time in the future. Readiness is a preliminary existing fact which
must exist before you can give a notice of readiness2. And another condition is that the master
must be in a position to say “I am ready at the moment you want me, whenever that may be,
and any necessary preliminaries on my part to the loading will not be such as to delay you."
Applying this test it is apparent that notice of readiness can be given even though there are
some further preliminaries to be done, or routine matters to be carried on, or formalities
observed. If those things are not such as to give any reason to suppose that they will cause
any delay.
In the present case there were pests in the hold such as to make the ship unready to receive
cargo. Fumigation was not a mere preliminary, nor a routine matter, nor a formality at all. It
was an essential step which had to be taken before any cargo could be received at all. Until
the vessel had been fumigated, notice of readiness could not be given3.
Judge opinied that “the presence of pests in the hold invalidated the notice of readiness. I
think the decision of Mocatta J. was right and I would dismiss this appeal.”
2
Atkin L.J. in Aktiebolaget Nordiska Lloyd v. J. Brownlie & Co. (Hull) Ltd. (1925) 30 Com.Cas. 307, 315.
3
Groves, Maclean and Co. v. Volkart Brothers (1884) 1 T.L.R. 92.
B. CAIRNS L.J.
“Those measures have to be taken, as the clause lays down, before notice of readiness is
tendered. There can be no doubt, having regard to the context, "clean, dry, without smell,"
that the words "in every way suitable to receive grain" include freedom from infestation.
There is no room for any argument that the measures to be taken were simple and
comparatively cheap and could be carried out before a berth was available. The parties have
agreed to these measures as a condition precedent to the service of the notice of readiness,
and that is an end of the matter.
I agree that the appeal should be dismissed”
C. ROSKILL L.J.
The arbitrators appeared to have allowed themselves to be influenced by their view that there
was a breach of contract on the part of the charterers in failing timeously to inspect the holds.
With respect, that view is misconceived, as is that part of their part of their award which, in
the alternative, gives damages to the owners for such breach. Mr. Mustill found himself
compelled to abandon that part of the award. I fear that the arbitrators allowed their view that
the charterers were at fault in this respect to colour their whole award.
Mr. Mustill's final point was that clause 6 was akin to a clause which provided for time lost
waiting for berth to count as lay time. I reject this contention as a matter of the construction
of the clause.
I have ventured to add to what Lord Denning M.R. and Cairns L.J. have said because we are
here dealing with a question of principle our answer to which (one hopes) will help to avoid
further disputes of this kind.
I agree entirely with Mocatta J.'s judgment4 and would dismiss the appeal
4
[1972] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 384

Compania de Naveira Nedelka Sa V Tradex Internacional Sa

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compania de Naveira Nedelka Sa V Tradex Internacional Sa

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COMPANIA DE NAVEIRA NEDELKA SA V TRADEX INTERNACIONAL SA

(THE TRES FLORES)

I. Facts of the Case

II. Issues/ Questions of Law

 That the “question of readiness is relative, to be assessed by what is expected of her

IV. Arguments by the Charterers

V. Judgment and Ratio

A. LORD DENNING M.R.

I agree that the appeal should be dismissed”

You might also like