Cargo Liens & Court Orders: Lessons from The Lord Hassam

 ⚖️ Cargo Liens & Court Orders: Lessons from The Lord Hassam

3 Quick Questions to Start:

• Can a shipowner enforce a lien over cargo even if the charterer doesn’t own it? 🤔
• Can courts order the sale of cargo as security for unpaid freight? ⚓
• Do you know the risks Owners and Charterers face when lien clauses are loosely worded? 📜

If you hesitated on any of these, today’s case study and clause breakdown will sharpen your understanding.

 

🔍 Clause Breakdown (Deep Dive)

At the heart of many time and voyage charters lies the Lien Clause. It allows Owners to retain possession of cargo for unpaid freight, demurrage, or other sums due under the charter. The clause acts as a shield for Owners — but how strong that shield is depends on wording, practice, and enforcement.

In The Lord Hassam [2024] EWHC 3305, the English High Court had to answer a tough question:
👉 Could the court order the sale of cargo subject to a contractual lien when Charterers hadn’t paid freight — even though they didn’t own the cargo?

This raised two operational truths for us in dry bulk:

1. Lien rights bite into cargo possession, not cargo ownership. An Owner can hold goods, but selling them requires legal authority.
2. Lien disputes delay operations. When cargo is tied up, discharge halts, costs mount, and reputations strain.

Practical example:
Imagine your bulk carrier discharges iron ore at Jorf Lasfar. Freight remains unpaid. You exercise a lien. But the cargo isn’t Charterers’ property — it belongs to the Shipper. Unless your clause is watertight, you risk a standoff: the ship is stuck, port dues climb, and your “security” may be weaker than you think.

⚠️ Common pitfall: Owners assume a lien automatically means “I can sell.” But unless the clause or governing law allows, you may only “hold” — not liquidate.

#MaritimeLaw #CharterPartyInsights #LienClause

 

🛠️ Practical Guidance

For Owners

• Check clause wording carefully. BIMCO standard forms (e.g., GENCON) include lien provisions, but check if they extend to sale rights.
• Keep clean paper trails. Notify Charterers and Shippers in writing when exercising a lien. Courts look for proper procedure.
• Seek security alternatives. Sometimes a bank guarantee or P&I LOI is faster and less disruptive than holding cargo.

For Charterers

• Avoid surprises. If you don’t own the cargo, make sure bills of lading and sale contracts align with your obligations.
• Communicate with shippers. Disputes damage commercial trust if cargo interests are blindsided.
• Pay attention to arbitration links. If Owners lien cargo while an arbitration claim is pending, timing and jurisdiction matter.

For Operators

• Spot early warning signs. Monitor overdue freight daily — lien is a last resort, not a first reaction.
• Plan for costs. Berth dues, storage, and even deterioration risks fall on your desk if lien delays escalate.
• Bridge legal + practical. Liaise with P&I and lawyers early if lien is being considered — it avoids costly missteps.

#ShipOperations #RiskManagement #ShippingContracts

 

🌊 Conclusion

The Lord Hassam ruling reminds us: a lien is not a magic hammer — it’s a careful tool. Owners, Charterers, and Operators must balance legal rights with commercial sense. In dry bulk shipping, the lesson is clear: prepare, document, and negotiate lien clauses with precision.

👉 What’s your view? Have you ever faced a lien dispute delaying cargo discharge? Share your story below.

If this insight helped,
👍 Like • 💬 Comment • 🔁 Share • ➕ Follow ShipOpsInsights with Dattaram for practical wisdom on dry bulk operations.

#ShippingCommunity #MaritimeMindset #ShipOpsWithDattaram

⚠️ Disclaimer: This blog is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice. For specific cases, always consult qualified maritime legal professionals.