Agritrade International Pte Ltd v Pacific Vigorous Shipping Inc: Misdelivery of Cargo & Election of Remedies
In Agritrade International Pte Ltd v Pacific Vigorous Shipping Inc, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal regarding the misdelivery of cargo. Agritrade sued Pacific Vigorous for misdelivery of cargo. The court, delivered by Belinda Ang Saw Ean J on 2006-06-09, allowed Agritrade’s appeal, entering interlocutory judgment for Agritrade with damages to be assessed, finding that Agritrade's acceptance of partial payment from the buyer did not preclude their claim against the shipowner for misdelivery.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Admiralty
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Agritrade sued Pacific Vigorous for misdelivery of cargo. The court allowed Agritrade's appeal, finding no election of remedies.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agritrade International Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Appeal Allowed | Won | Loo Dip Seng |
| Pacific Vigorous Shipping Inc | Defendant | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Leong Kah Wah, Derek Tan |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Loo Dip Seng | Ang & Partners |
| Leong Kah Wah | Rajah & Tann |
| Derek Tan | Rajah & Tann |
4. Facts
- Agritrade sold cargo to Bhatia under Contract No BIL 510205 dated 2 February 2005.
- Five bills of lading were issued for the cargo shipped on board the Pacific Vigorous.
- Bhatia issued letters of indemnity to Eitzen Bulk A/S for delivery of cargo without production of bills of lading.
- The vessel arrived at Pipavav on or about 4 March 2005, and the cargo was discharged and delivered to Bhatia by 8 March 2005.
- Discrepancies in shipping documents were notified to Agritrade on 11 March 2005.
- Bhatia unilaterally deducted US$372,249.51 and credited Agritrade’s account with US$1,218,281.60.
- Agritrade commenced in rem proceedings against the Pacific Vigorous on 15 April 2005.
5. Formal Citations
- The "Pacific Vigorous", Adm in Rem 66/2005, RA 267/2005, [2006] SGHC 103
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Contract No BIL 510205 dated between Agritrade and Bhatia International Ltd signed. | |
| Five bills of lading issued for the cargo shipped on board the Pacific Vigorous. | |
| Bhatia issued three letters of indemnity to Eitzen Bulk A/S. | |
| Eitzen Bulk A/S issued back-to-back letters of indemnity to the defendant. | |
| The vessel arrived at the discharge port of Pipavav. | |
| The entire cargo was discharged and delivered to Bhatia. | |
| Discrepancies in the shipping documents tendered to the issuing banks were formally notified to Agritrade. | |
| Communications on the contractual quality of the cargo ensued between Agritrade and Bhatia. | |
| Communications on the contractual quality of the cargo ensued between Agritrade and Bhatia. | |
| Bhatia credited Agritrade’s bank account with the sum of US$1,218,281.60 for the cargo. | |
| Agritrade commenced in rem proceedings against the Pacific Vigorous. | |
| Defence filed. | |
| Affidavit of Pin Ying-Kwan dated. | |
| Order of court dated allowing all pleadings and affidavits filed on behalf of the interveners were allowed to stand as though they were the defendant’s. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Misdelivery of Cargo
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant was liable for misdelivery of the cargo.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1995] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 144
- [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 541
- [2003] 1 SLR 471
- Election of Remedies
- Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff's acceptance of partial payment from the buyer did not constitute an election of remedies that precluded their claim against the shipowner.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1921] 2 KB 608
- (1882) 7 App Cas 345
- [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 391
- [1996] AC 514
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Misdelivery of Cargo
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Shipping Litigation
11. Industries
- Shipping
- Commodities Trading
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Ines | High Court | Yes | [1995] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 144 | England and Wales | Cited as a case in point for Agritrade, regarding delivery of goods without production of bills of lading. |
| Kuwait Petroleum Corporation v I&D Oil Carriers Ltd (The Houda) | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 541 | England and Wales | Cited for stressing the fundamental nature of the promise not to deliver other than in return for a bill of lading. |
| The Cherry | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2003] 1 SLR 471 | Singapore | Cited for stressing the fundamental nature of the promise not to deliver other than in return for a bill of lading. |
| The Future Express | N/A | Yes | [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 79 | N/A | Cited to support the point that the contract of carriage generally continues and the bill of lading remains effective until the goods are delivered to the person entitled under the bill of lading. |
| BNP Paribas v Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2003] 3 SLR 611 | Singapore | Cited to support the point that a lawful holder is entitled to sue in contract in respect of any breach of the contract of carriage committed even prior to the time at which the claimant became holder of the bill. |
| Verschures Creameries, Limited v Hull and Netherlands Steamship Company, Limited | N/A | Yes | [1921] 2 KB 608 | England and Wales | Cited by the defendant to support the contention that Agritrade’s conduct leading up to and including the acceptance of payment from Bhatia amounted to an election by Agritrade to treat the earlier defective performance as good delivery under the contract of carriage. |
| United Australia, Limited v Barclays Bank, Limited | House of Lords | Yes | [1941] AC 1 | England and Wales | Cited for the position that the delivery in Verschures Creameries had been ratified because the carriers were the seller’s agents. |
| Benjamin Scarf v Alfred George Jardine | N/A | Yes | (1882) 7 App Cas 345 | N/A | Cited on the question of election. |
| Oliver Ashworth (Holdings) Ltd v Ballard (Kent) Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2000] Ch 12 | England and Wales | Cited for making a distinction between “rights” and “remedies” for the purpose of determining the time at which an election must be made. |
| Motor Oil Hellas (Corinth) Refineries SA v Shipping Corporation of India (The “Kanchenjunga”) | N/A | Yes | [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 391 | N/A | Cited for the point that a prerequisite of this election is that the party making the choice must be aware of the facts which have given rise to the existence of his new right. |
| Personal Representatives of Tang Man Sit v Capacious Investments Ltd | N/A | Yes | [1996] AC 514 | N/A | Cited for discussing alternative remedies and cumulative remedies. |
| Lissenden v C A V Bosch Limited | N/A | Yes | [1940] AC 412 | N/A | Cited for the point that no person is taken to have made an election until he has had an opportunity of ascertaining his rights, and is aware of their nature and extent. |
| Peyman v Lanjani | N/A | Yes | [1985] 1 Ch 457 | England and Wales | Cited for the point that a person cannot be held to have made the irrevocable choice between rescission and affirmation which election involves unless he had knowledge of his legal right to choose and actually chose with that knowledge. |
| Evans v Bartlam | N/A | Yes | [1937] AC 473 | N/A | Cited regarding the equitable doctrine of election. |
| O’Connor v S P Bray, Limited | N/A | Yes | (1936) 36 SR (NSW) 248 | N/A | Cited regarding the equitable doctrine of election. |
| Treasure Valley Group Ltd v Saputra Teddy | N/A | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR 358 | Singapore | Cited as a case where the equitable doctrine was applied on the facts. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Bills of Lading Act (Cap 384, 1994 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Sale of Goods Act (Cap 393, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Misdelivery
- Bills of Lading
- Election of Remedies
- Letters of Indemnity
- Contract of Carriage
- Sale of Goods
- Partial Payment
15.2 Keywords
- misdelivery
- bills of lading
- election of remedies
- shipping
- contract
16. Subjects
- Shipping
- Contract Law
- Commercial Law
17. Areas of Law
- Admiralty Law
- Contract Law
- Shipping Law
- Agency Law