Panel recalculates time loss under clause 15 for underperformance

This is a SMA Award published in 1972 arising under a NYPE Form 1946 charterparty as amended. One of the issues referred to the failure to perform the warranted speed and the Charterers claimed time loss, as "off hire" time under clause 15.

Charterers had the vessels’ performance examined by a firm of weather analysis experts who developed a procedure of feeding into a computer the weather and performance shown in vessel’s logs and then comparing the ship's accomplishments against performance curves the firm compiled from 10,000 voyages of 70 other vessels which were supplemented by any known weather conditions reported by current vessels on or near the same track positions traversed by the vessel on her numerous voyages over the 2 year charter.

The experts' computer output evaluation was that the vessel was only capable of 11.9 knots “in a calm” weather. Charterers used this alleged 1.1 knot deficiency to arrive at a total hire loss of 26.2 days after it had been applied to all steaming time of the vessel subsequent to the first 3 voyages, charterers conceding that the represented “about 13 knots” speed was attained on those 3 voyages. Although the logs showed no “breakdown or defect in hull or machinery” the charterers asked the panel to infer that a reduction from 105/109 rpm on the first 3 voyages to about 100/104 rpm on all subsequent voyages must have been due to an engine deficiency that vessel personnel failed to report, and this defect entitled them to a refund of hire under clause 15 of the charter.

The panel felt that any computer input based on the imprecise nature of unverified weather reports from vessels at sea not employing uniform standards of data recording, could only render the resultant output inconclusive. Nor could the panel accept testimony given that any one set of curves could have equal application to other vessels.

The panel thereupon employed formulae of their own, taking into consideration (1) vessel's attained speeds in good weather up to Force 4, (2) wind, sea and current conditions on all passages both loaded and light, (3) engine performance including an unrealistic constant fuel consumption in the logs of 20 tons daily regardless of weather or engine power notch setting, (4) that the description of weather conditions in vessel's log books appears exaggerated and other data unreliable, and (5) the panels interpretation that this vessel's contracted speed in good weather is 12.6 knots after allowing .5 knot for ““about” and adding 0.1 knot for the vessel not being always fully laden.

The result was the decision and award of the arbitrators that the vessel's speed was deficient and caused loss of time to the extent of 9.165 days over the charter period, together with extra consumption

Note: This is provided for information purposes only. Whether such a recalculation is appropriate in the circumstances is a matter I leave for readers to consider.