The claimants of this case are (C1) SUEZ FORTUNE INVESTMENTS LTD (C2) PIRAEUS BANK AE, the party of (C1) also the ship owner of this case. (D1) TALBOT UNDERWRITING LTD,(D2) HISCOX SYNDICATES LTD, (D3) QBE CORPORATE LTD, (D4) CHAUCER CORPORATE CAPITAL (NO.2) LTD, (D5) MARKEL CAPITAL LTD, (D6) CATLIN SYNDICATE LTD, (D7) APRILGRANGE LTD, (D8) BRIT UW LTD, (D9) NOVAE CORPORATE UNDERWRITING LTD, (D10) GAI INDEMNITY LTD. All of these companies are insurers and also the defendants of this case.
The background fact happens due to the cargo of 141,000 metric tons of fuel oil was carried by tanker Brillante Virtuoso was en route from Kerch in Ukraine to Qingdao in China. Although owners had made arrangements for an unarmed security team to embark at Aden when the vessel transit to an area of pirate attack, the vessel still attacked by the pirates because the pirate pretended the uniformed men and introduced themselves as “port authority”. After that, the pirate who ordered the master to take the vessel to Somalia, however when the main engine stopped and it could not restart again. The pirates …show more content…
In estimate the repairing cost, the judge expressed that needs to ask the prudent uninsured shipowner in the position of the claimants whether the vessel are decided to repair and how or where the repair should be carried out. The judge thought that the quotation for repairs in China was lower that Middle East, but there were some factors needs to be considered because not least the risks of towing the vessel to the China. Therefore the repairing was conducted in the Middle East was reasonable. The costs of repair would have exceeded the insured value on either basis because taking into account salvage and standby tugs. So, accordingly, the vessel was a
The background fact happens due to the cargo of 141,000 metric tons of fuel oil was carried by tanker Brillante Virtuoso was en route from Kerch in Ukraine to Qingdao in China. Although owners had made arrangements for an unarmed security team to embark at Aden when the vessel transit to an area of pirate attack, the vessel still attacked by the pirates because the pirate pretended the uniformed men and introduced themselves as “port authority”. After that, the pirate who ordered the master to take the vessel to Somalia, however when the main engine stopped and it could not restart again. The pirates …show more content…
In estimate the repairing cost, the judge expressed that needs to ask the prudent uninsured shipowner in the position of the claimants whether the vessel are decided to repair and how or where the repair should be carried out. The judge thought that the quotation for repairs in China was lower that Middle East, but there were some factors needs to be considered because not least the risks of towing the vessel to the China. Therefore the repairing was conducted in the Middle East was reasonable. The costs of repair would have exceeded the insured value on either basis because taking into account salvage and standby tugs. So, accordingly, the vessel was a