PT Soonlee v Synergy Shipping: Unseaworthy Barge & Liability for Lost Cargo

In PT Soonlee Metalindo Perkasa v Synergy Shipping Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore addressed a claim arising from the loss of cargo during sea transport. PT Soonlee, the plaintiff, sued Synergy Shipping, the defendant, for failing to deliver 300 bundles of steel bars from Singapore to Batam. The cargo was lost due to the unseaworthiness of the barge Limin XIX, supplied by Freighter Services Pte Ltd, the third party. Judith Prakash J ruled in favor of PT Soonlee, finding Synergy Shipping liable for the loss, but limited the liability to £30,000. The court also ruled that Freighter Services Pte Ltd must indemnify Synergy Shipping for the claim.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiff, liability limited to £30,000; Third party to indemnify Defendant.

1.3 Case Type

Admiralty

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

PT Soonlee sued Synergy Shipping for lost cargo due to an unseaworthy barge. The court found Synergy liable but limited to £30,000, with indemnity from Freighter Services.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
PT Soonlee Metalindo PerkasaPlaintiffCorporationJudgment for PlaintiffPartial
Synergy Shipping Pte LtdDefendantCorporationLiability limitedPartial
Freighter Services Pte LtdThird PartyCorporationIndemnify DefendantLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Judith PrakashJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Loo Dip SengAng & Partners
Charmaine FuAng & Partners
Bazul Ashhab bin Abdul KaderT S Oon & Bazul
Kelly Yap Ming KwangT S Oon & Bazul
Wendy TanHaq & Selvam
Anand Su YinHaq & Selvam

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff owned 300 bundles of steel bars to be shipped from Singapore to Batam.
  2. Defendant contracted to carry the cargo on the barge Limin XIX.
  3. The barge was supplied to the defendant by the third party, Freighter Services Pte Ltd.
  4. The cargo was lost during the voyage.
  5. The barge was found to be in poor condition with corrosion and holes in the hull.
  6. The defendant did not lash the cargo to the barge.
  7. The bill of lading contained a clause limiting liability to £100 per package.

5. Formal Citations

  1. PT Soonlee Metalindo Perkasa v Synergy Shipping Pte Ltd (Freighter Services Pte Ltd, Third Party), Adm in Per 143/2005, [2007] SGHC 121

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Defendant and third party entered into the Joint Operation Agreement.
Plaintiff purchased 1,300 tons of deformed steel bars from Sin Aik.
Cargo delivered to defendant; Barge left Singapore.
Surveyor attended on board the Barge at Batu Ampar port, Batam.
Surveyor attended on board the Barge at Batu Ampar port, Batam.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Unseaworthiness
    • Outcome: The court found that the barge was unseaworthy due to its poor physical condition and corrosion.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Corrosion
      • Wasting of plating
      • Hole in bulkhead
  2. Breach of Contract
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant breached its obligation to provide a seaworthy vessel.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to provide seaworthy vessel
      • Failure to lash cargo
  3. Limitation of Liability
    • Outcome: The court held that the defendant was entitled to limit its liability to £100 per package, totaling £30,000.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Interpretation of bill of lading clauses
      • Incorporation of clauses
  4. Indemnity
    • Outcome: The court found that the third party was liable to indemnify the defendant in respect of the plaintiff’s claim.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Indemnification

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract
  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Shipping Litigation

11. Industries

  • Shipping
  • Steel

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Kopitoff v WilsonQueen's Bench DivisionYes[1876] 1 QBD 377England and WalesCited for the definition of seaworthiness.
Ever Lucky Shipping Company Limited v Sunlight Mercantile Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2003] SGHC 80SingaporeCited for the definition of seaworthiness, specifically the objective test of whether a prudent owner would have required the defect in the ship to be made good before sending his ship to sea had he known of it.
Sunlight Mercantile Pte Ltd v Ever Lucky Shipping Co LtdCourt of AppealYes[2004] 1 SLR 171SingaporeCited for the principle that a shipowner has an absolute obligation to send his ship out to sea in a seaworthy state at the commencement of the agreed voyage.
Atlantic Shipping and Trading Co v Louis Dreyfus & CoHouse of LordsYes[1922] 2 AC 250England and WalesCited for the principle that a shipowner has an absolute obligation to send his ship out to sea in a seaworthy state at the commencement of the agreed voyage.
McCutcheon v David MacBrayne LtdHouse of LordsYes[1964] 1 LLR 16England and WalesCited to support the argument that the defendant had not made known to it the four terms prior to shipment or the making of the contract of carriage and as such the four terms were not terms that had been agreed to by the plaintiff.
Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co LtdQueen's Bench DivisionYes[1954] 2 QB 402England and WalesCited for the legal principle that where parties enter into a contract of carriage with the expectation that a bill of lading will be issued to cover it, they enter into it upon those terms which they know or expect the bill of lading to contain.
Ailsa Craig Fishing Co Ltd v Malvern Fishing Co LtdHouse of LordsYes[1983] 1 All ER 101England and WalesCited for the principle that courts do not regard limitation clauses with the same hostility as they do clauses of exclusion.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Marine Insurance Act (Cap 387, 1994 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Unseaworthiness
  • Bill of Lading
  • Limitation of Liability
  • Indemnity
  • Cargo
  • Voyage Charterparties
  • Joint Operation Agreement
  • Lashing
  • Seaworthiness

15.2 Keywords

  • Unseaworthy barge
  • Cargo loss
  • Shipping liability
  • Admiralty law
  • Singapore High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Carriage of goods by sea95
Shipping90
Admiralty and Maritime Law90
Seaworthiness85
Shipping Law80
Voyage charterparties75
Limitation of Liabilities65
Contract Law60
Breach of Contract60
Bill of Lading55
Bailment50
Contracts50

16. Subjects

  • Shipping
  • Admiralty
  • Contract Law