Pera Shipping Corpn v Petroship SA
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1985 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
18 cases
-
Ship Starsin, Re, (2003) 307 N.R. 100 (HL)
...565, refd to. [para. 141]. Ship Mormacstar, Re, [1973] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 485 (U.S. 2nd Cir.), refd to. [para. 143]. Ship Pera, Re, [1985] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 103 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Wilson v. Darling Island Stevedoring & Lighterage Co. (1956), 95 C.L.R. 43 (Aus. H.C.), refd to. [para. 146].......
-
Boskalis Offshore Marine Contracting BV v Atlantic Marine and Aviation LLP (the “Atlantic Tonjer”)
...para [14]. 24 Another example is the time bar clause; claims have to be advanced within a specified period to be valid. Pera Shipping Corp v Petroship SA (The Pera) [1985] 2 Lloyd's Rep 103 involved the construction of a time bar clause in a demurrage clause. The Court of Appeal held that ......
-
“Amalie Essberger” Tankreederei GmbH & Company KG v Marubeni Corporation
...the ambiguity is to be resolved in such a way as not to prevent an otherwise legitimate claim from being pursued; see Pera Shipping Corporation v Petroship SA (The Pera) [1985] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 103 at page 106 per Lloyd LJ, and at page 108 per Slade and Griffiths LJJ. However, the words in a......
-
Euronav N.v v. Repsol Trading S.A.
...a way as not to prevent an otherwise legitimate claim from being pursued; see Pera Shipping Corporation v Petroship SA (The Pera) [1985] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 103 at page 106 per Lloyd LJ, and at page 108 per Slade and Griffiths LJJ. However, the words in a time bar provision must be given their ......
Request a trial to view additional results