A ship was fixed on a charterparty form containing a time bar clause that provided that all claims, charges and expenses had to be submitted within 90 days of the completion of the discharge or otherwise would be deemed waived.
The fixture also incorporated a set of additional clauses one of which related to expenses incurred if the ship called at a named port. This provided that the owners would pay in the first instance
and be reimbursed by the charterers on submission of all invoices and supporting documents. No time limit was specified in this clause.
The commercial manager collated the expenses related to the specific port call and sent them to the charterers sometime after discharge and certainly more than 90 days after discharge. They were looking at the port expenses clause on its own in the charterparty, rather than reading the contract as a whole.
The charterers rejected the claim on the basis that it was time-barred. The commercial manager relied on the fact that there was no specific time bar in the additional clause. Legal advice was obtained and the Member was advised that the additional clause did not negate the general time bar clause as there was no conflict between them. The expenses claimed were therefore time barred.
The claim of USD 200,000 was paid by ITIC.