Out of Sight, Never Out of Mind: Navigating Restricted Visibility under Charter Party Obligations

 🌫️ Out of Sight, Never Out of Mind: Navigating Restricted Visibility under Charter Party Obligations

❓ Three Quick Questions to Spark Curiosity

1. Does a vessel’s seaworthiness include readiness to navigate safely in restricted visibility?
2. Can a Master’s handling of fog situations impact charter party performance claims?
3. Are Owners exposed to liability if a collision occurs due to improper fog procedures?

 

⚖️ Clause Breakdown & Professional Insight

Most charter parties include clauses tied to seaworthiness, safe navigation, and due diligence under COLREGs 1972. While not always explicitly mentioning restricted visibility, the obligations to operate prudently and avoid endangering cargo, crew, and third parties are implied.

🔹 Explanation:
Restricted visibility clauses are not usually standalone, but derive from seaworthiness and “employment in lawful trades” provisions. Failure to comply with COLREGs in foggy conditions may render the vessel unseaworthy or constitute a breach of the “reasonable despatch” obligation.

🔹 Implications:

• For Owners: Failure to reduce speed, sound signals, or post extra lookouts could result in liability for collisions or cargo delays.
• For Charterers: Off-hire disputes may arise if delays in fog are considered unreasonable.
• For Cargo Interests: Cargo claims may arise under Hague-Visby Rules if lack of prudent navigation leads to damage.

🔹 Examples & Case Law:

• The Eurasian Dream [2002]: Highlighted Owners’ duty to exercise due diligence in safe navigation and planning.
• The Star Sea [2001]: Reinforced that seaworthiness extends to crew competence and adherence to international rules like COLREGs.
• BIMCO guidance notes underline that restricted visibility operations form part of the vessel’s safety management and seaworthiness obligations.

🔹 Common Pitfalls:

• Not reducing speed adequately (“safe speed” is a judgment call but must err on caution).
• Failure to use sound signals at required intervals.
• Over-reliance on radar without proper visual lookout.
• Incomplete recording in deck log and bell book, weakening evidence in case of dispute.

 

✅ Actionable Steps for Operators, Managers, Owners, Charterers

🔹 Masters & Owners:

• Enforce standing orders for reduced speed, double lookouts, and fog signal use.
• Document every step in the logbook for legal protection.

🔹 Operators:

• Advise Charterers of possible delays in restricted visibility areas (e.g., Malacca Strait, Yangtze River).
• Keep transparent communication to mitigate disputes.

🔹 Charterers:

• Allow reasonable allowances for delays due to fog under off-hire or laytime clauses.
• Avoid pressing Masters to maintain schedules at the expense of safety.

🔹 Managers:

• Train bridge teams with simulator exercises for fog navigation.
• Reinforce COLREGs rules on restricted visibility (Rule 19, Rule 35).

 

🔚 Conclusion & Call-to-Action

Restricted visibility is more than a navigational challenge—it’s a legal and commercial risk under charter parties. Masters who prepare, document, and act prudently not only protect lives and cargo but also safeguard Owners from costly disputes.

👉 If you found this breakdown useful, like, comment, share, and subscribe to ShipOpsInsight for more practical shipping wisdom tailored to operators, owners, and charterers.

 

⚠️ Disclaimer: This blog post is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult charter party terms, case law, and professional counsel for specific situations.