„The owners guarantee that the vessel will be registered and will remain in a P-I association for the duration of this charter. The entrance covers, but is not limited to the ordinary coverage of freight rights. In the event of damage and/or loss of the cargo carried on the vessel to which the owners and/or charterers could be implicated in the conditions of that party to charter, the owners and/or charterers, upon request, grant a reasonable extension of time for the start of the trial in each case. These extensions do not affect the final liability of both parties. Responsibility for cargo claims between charterers and owners will be distributed and settled in accordance with Interclub New York Produce`s 1996 exchange agreement and subsequent amendments. Comments: In order for a right to be recovered under the ICA, the underlying rights must have been invoked in the context of a transport contract that was authorized after the charter holiday, i.e. a letter of car issued under the charter part was not issued in this manner in violation of the conditions of the charter party in power. The term „transportation contract“ is very broad and, therefore, ICA rights can arise under all types of transport contract, including car letters, shipping letters, chartered lots or even under-chartered parts. Considering that the ICA is a trade agreement, the courts often do not agree that a Ladais law has not been issued under the terms of the C/P and is not, as such, „unauthorized“ for the purposes of the ICA – see London Arbitration 3/13. In this case, the issue was whether the charterers` right of appeal was prescribed after 24 months after the delivery date of the cargo by the provisions of clause (6) of the ICA.

While it is wise for those responsible for time protection/reasonable time frames, this decision reinforces the view that, as usual, when the NYPE charter includes the ICA, more flexible provisions apply to claims. This is economically useful, particularly to allow late claims to be passed on in time shortly before the end of the year. (ii) where the words „freight claims“ are added to the second sentence of section 26 of the New York Produce Exchange Form 1946 or 1993 or to section 25 of the 1981 Asbatime form, the allocation under this agreement will not be applied under any circumstances, even if the chartering party is subject to the provisions of that agreement; Comments: The above clause is from the 2011 version of the ICA. Prior to 2011, there was no English legal authority on whether a party had the right to guarantee a right before the right to the underlying cargo was settled. This situation was found to be unsatisfactory by the SdA, as it resulted in unnecessary costs to the parties, not least because there were often legitimate doubts that charterers could no longer be exchanged until a freight fee was paid and, as such, could no longer be considered owners. Comments: In Section 2 of the scope, it is stated that the provisions of the ICA apply, notwithstanding the contrary provisions, to any other provision of the charter party. Accordingly, any attempt to insert a different clause providing for a different distribution of liability from that of the ICA must be refuted. However, it is important to consider section 4 b) (ii) above. Although it is not customary for „freight claims“ to be included in section 26 of the NYPE or ins.25 of the Asbatime form, the ICA does not apply at all to the contract. (i) that the inclusion of the terms „and liability“ in Term 8 of the New York Produce Exchange Form 1946 or 1993, or clause 8 of the Asbatime 1981 form, or any similar change made by the party to the charter, which makes the master responsible for handling the cargo, does not constitute a significant change; and once the claim has been communicated to the other party, time is protected.