Herculito Maritime Ltd and others v Gunvor International BV and others

Decision date: 17 January 2024

Neutral citation: [2024] UKSC 2

Court: United Kingdom Supreme Court

Insurance classification confidence: high

Overall AI summary confidence: medium

AI notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary, or obiter dicta summary on this page is AI-generated. It is provided solely to help users assess possible relevance and may be inaccurate or incomplete. It is not legal advice. Users should read the original judgment and obtain appropriate legal advice before relying on any summary.

Short overview

A short description of the case, material issue, and outcome where supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this overview: medium

This dispute concerns liability of cargo interests to contribute to general average for a US$7.7m ransom paid after MT POLAR was seized by Somali pirates, and whether voyage-charter war-risk and Gulf of Aden clauses (and parts incorporated into the bills of lading) barred the shipowner from claiming such losses from charterer or bill of lading holders because additional insurance cover was procured. The arbitration tribunal upheld the cargo interests on issues (1)–(4); the Commercial Court agreed with the arbitrators on (1) and (2) but allowed the shipowner's appeal on (3) and (4); the Court of Appeal dismissed that appeal and held that the cargo interests did have to contribute to general average. The Supreme Court judgment text supplied is incomplete and does not record a final Supreme Court disposition in the omitted part.

Ratio decidendi

The legal reasoning necessary to the outcome, where it can safely be identified from the judgment.

AI confidence in this ratio summary: low

No clear binding ratio can safely be identified from the judgment.

Obiter dicta

Judicial observations that were not necessary to the outcome, where they can safely be identified.

AI confidence in this obiter summary: low

No clear obiter dicta can safely be identified from the judgment.

Warning

The automated summary was prepared from selected parts of a longer judgment; consult the original decision for the complete reasoning. The middle of the judgment was omitted; material reasoning and any final Supreme Court decision may be missing.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML