Robert is regularly involved in a variety of general commercial disputes beyond the core areas of Chambers’ work. Recently these have covered areas as diverse as software licensing, windfarm joint ventures, investment trusts and directors’ duties.
Robert has a busy and broad practice in this area, taking in all aspects of dry shipping and commodities. As well as numerous arbitrations and unreported cases, Robert has appeared in a number of reported decisions at both High Court and Court of Appeal level, including the following:
Dolphin Maritime and Aviation Services Ltd v Sveriges Angartygs Assurans Forening [2009] Ll Rep Plus 50 - this very recent decision concerned the application of the EU Judgments Regulation to the torts of inducing a breach of contract and unlawful means conspiracy and the scope of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999.
The Petroleum Oil and Gas Corporation of South Africa (PTY) Ltd v FR8 Singapore Pte Ltd (The “ETERNITY”) [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 107. The dispute related to the obligation to operate an inert gas system in accordance with IMO procedures was absolute or one of due diligence, whether a failure to adequately operate an inert gas system was covered by the exception for default in management of the vessel under Art IV Hague-Visby rules and whether a demurrage claim was time-barred by a failure to present signed pumping logs.
Verity Shipping SA and Another v NV Norexia and others (The “SKIER STAR”) [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 652: Robert acted for the Defendant bill of lading holders successfully applying to set aside an anti-suit injunction on the grounds of delay and risk of inconsistent decisions.
Pacific Maritime (Asia) Ltd v Holystone Overseas Ltd [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 371. This case concerned a freezing order under s 44 Arbitration Act 1996 in relation to a dispute about liability under a Memorandum of Agreement for the sale of a floating prison.
Compania Sud American Vapores v MS ER Hamburg Schiffahrtsgesellschaft MBH & Co KG [2006] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 66 – The issue was the interaction of Clause 8 NYPE, placing responsibility for loading and stowing on the charterers, and seaworthiness obligations under the Hague-Visby Rules. Robert was led by Jeremy Russell QC on behalf of the Owners, who were successful.
Ceroilfood Shandong Cereals and Oils and Another v Toledo Shipping Corporation (The “TOLEDO CARRIER”) [2006] Lloyd's Rep. Plus 105: this claim arose out of damage to a cargo of garlic by sea water. The issue was unseaworthiness, and whether the ‘perils of the sea’ exception applied. Robert acted for the successful Owners.
Daewoo Heavy Industries Ltd. and another v. Klipriver Shipping Ltd. and another (The “KAPITAN PETKO VOIVODA”) [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 1. Robert was led by Nicholas Hamblen QC in this case, which is one of the leading authorities on the carriage of deck cargo under the Hague Rules. This case establishes that it is possible to limit liability under the Hague Rules where an Owner carries deck cargo in breach of contract.
Maintop Shipping Company Limited v. Bulkindo Lines Pte Limited (The “MARINICKI”) [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 655: this was a safe port case under the NYPE form where the vessel had suffered serious bottom damage at Jakarta. Robert acted for the successful Owners against the time charterers.
Following involvement in cases such as the Piper Alpha disaster in the early years of his practice, Robert has recently been involved in three substantial arbitrations in the offshore sector focusing on legal and technical issues arising out of pipeline construction and maintenance. In addition, he has experience in technical disputes relating to jack-up and pontoon rigs, ROV’s and recovery of oil from sunken vessels.
Robert’s practice has necessarily involved him in many disputes with an international flavour and he appears regularly in arbitrations held under the LMAA, LCIA and ICC Rules.
Robert’s practice encompasses both marine and non-marine and he regularly advises on many aspects on all aspects of insurance.
Reported cases include:
Beazley v Horizon Offshore Contractors Inc [2005] Lloyd's Rep IR 231 - Robert acted for the Claimant insurers, who were seeking negative declaratory relief by reason of misrepresentation and non-disclosure. Robert successfully obtained an anti-suit injunction to restrain proceedings on a marine insurance policy by the assured in Texas, in breach of an exclusive jurisdiction clause nominating the English courts.
Advent Capital Plc v Ellinas Imports-Exports Ltd [2005] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 607- Robert acted as a junior to Michael Howard QC on behalf of the Claimant insurers under a cargo policy. The policy contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of England, and the Claimants had obtained an anti-suit injunction against proceedings by the Defendant Assureds in Cyprus. Since Cyprus subsequently became a member of the European Union and therefore subject to the Judgments Regulation, the question was whether the anti-suit injunction should be discharged, and whether the insurers’ subsequent claim for negative declaratory relief contravened the ‘first seised’ rule under the Regulation.
Robert has experience in attending mediations on behalf of clients.
Since starting in Chambers, Robert has been involved in numerous collision and salvage cases and regularly appears in LOF salvage arbitrations, variously for ship, cargo and contractors.
Robert appeared before the Court of Appeal in E. D. & F. Man Liquid Products Ltd v. Patel and Another Times Law Reports 18th April 2003 (CA), one of the leading cases on the meaning of ‘real prospect of successfully defending the claim’ in CPR rules 13.3(1)(a) and 24.2(a)(ii).
Robert’s core practice areas in shipping and insurance mean that he encounters issues relating to conflicts of laws and jurisdiction on a very regular basis. Recent reported decisions on the conflicts of laws include:
Dolphin Maritime and Aviation Services Ltd v Sveriges Angartygs Assurans Forening [2009] Ll Rep Plus 50 - this very recent decision on the application of the EU Judgments Regulation to the torts of inducing a breach of contract and unlawful means conspiracy.
Verity Shipping SA and Another v NV Norexia and others (The “SKIER STAR”) [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 652: Robert acted for the Defendant bill of lading holders successfully applying to set aside an anti-suit injunction on the grounds of delay and risk of inconsistent decisions.
Beazley v Horizon Offshore Contractors Inc [2005] Lloyd's Rep IR 231 and Advent Capital Plc v. Ellinas Imports-Exports Ltd [2005] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 607 (for both see above under insurance)
