London Arbitration 10/22

Owners appealed a Chinese court’s judgment holding them liable for cargo (heat) damage under a B/L, but then settled with cargo interests and sought an indemnity under the ICA.  Dismissing Charterers’ arguments, the Tribunal held that even though the damage arguably arose post-discharge, the allegation related to carriage, making it a qualifying “Cargo Claim”; it was not improperly settled and thus met the threshold. However, the damage could not be attributed to loading or handling so 8(d) rather than 8(b) applied, resulting in a 50/50 apportionment, which was not displaced by any “act or neglect”.