Thoresen Shipping v Global Symphony: Limitation of Liabilities & Tonnage in Admiralty Collision
In Thoresen Shipping Singapore Pte Ltd and others v Global Symphony SA and others, the Singapore High Court addressed an application by the Plaintiffs, Thoresen Shipping Singapore Private Limited, Thoresen Thai Agencies Public Company Limited, and Thoresen & Company (Bangkok) Limited, for the return and cancellation of a letter of undertaking (LOU) deposited in court to constitute a limitation fund following a collision between the vessels "GLOBAL VANGUARD" and "THOR ACHIEVER". The court, presided over by Justice Pang Khang Chau, granted the application with modifications, ordering the discharge of the LOU, its return for cancellation, and granting leave for the discontinuation of the limitation action, after addressing concerns about the sufficiency of evidence and the framing of a prayer.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Letter of Undertaking discharged; order granted for return of LOU for cancellation; leave granted for discontinuation of limitation action.
1.3 Case Type
Admiralty
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court judgment regarding the return and cancellation of a letter of undertaking in a limitation action following a vessel collision.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thoresen Shipping Singapore Private Limited | Plaintiff | Corporation | Order granted for return of LOU for cancellation | Won | |
| Thoresen Thai Agencies Public Company Limited | Plaintiff | Corporation | Order granted for return of LOU for cancellation | Won | |
| Thoresen & Company (Bangkok) Limited | Plaintiff | Corporation | Order granted for return of LOU for cancellation | Won | |
| Global Symphony SA | Defendant | Corporation | Settlement Agreement | Settled | |
| NYK Global Bulk Corporation | Defendant | Corporation | Settlement Agreement | Settled | |
| Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha (NYK) | Defendant | Corporation | Settlement Agreement | Settled | |
| South32 Marketing Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Settlement Agreement | Settled | |
| Hillside Aluminium Proprietary Limited | Defendant | Corporation | Settlement Agreement | Settled | |
| Mozal SA | Defendant | Corporation | Settlement Agreement | Settled | |
| All other persons claiming or entitled to claim loss, damage, and/or expense arising out of the collision between the vessel “GLOBAL VANGUARD” and the vessel “THOR ACHIEVER” on or about 8 March 2017 | Defendant | Other | Settlement Agreement | Settled |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Pang Khang Chau | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The vessel Thor Achiever collided with the vessel Global Vanguard on 8 March 2017.
- Plaintiffs commenced a limitation action and obtained a limitation decree on 25 July 2017.
- A letter of undertaking (LOU) was deposited in court on 15 August 2017 to constitute the Limitation Fund.
- The 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants brought claims against the Limitation Fund.
- The Plaintiffs and the said Defendants entered into a Settlement Agreement on 20 January 2020.
- A total of S$11,260,124.48 was paid to the said Defendants on 30 January 2020.
- The payment represented the size of the Limitation Fund as of 31 December 2019.
5. Formal Citations
- Thoresen Shipping Singapore Pte Ltd and others v Global Symphony SA and others, Admiralty in Personam No 46 of 2017 (Summons No 1472 of 2020), [2020] SGHC 153
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Vessel Thor Achiever collided with vessel Global Vanguard | |
| Plaintiffs obtained a limitation decree | |
| Letter of Undertaking deposited in court | |
| Time limit fixed by the Limitation Decree for claims against the Limitation Fund | |
| Settlement Agreement entered into between Plaintiffs and Defendants | |
| Payment made to the Defendants | |
| First hearing of SUM 1472 | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Exhaustion of Limitation Fund
- Outcome: Court declined to declare the Limitation Fund exhausted.
- Category: Substantive
- Discharge of Letter of Undertaking
- Outcome: Court ordered the Letter of Undertaking to be discharged.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the Limitation Fund be deemed exhausted
- Return and cancellation of the Letter of Undertaking
- Discontinuance of the Limitation action
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No cited cases | |||||
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Merchant Shipping Act (Cap 179, 1996 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Limitation Fund
- Letter of Undertaking
- Limitation Decree
- Post-constitution interest
- Settlement Agreement
- Limitation action
15.2 Keywords
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Collision
- Limitation of Liability
- Letter of Undertaking
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Admiralty and Maritime Law | 95 |
| Shipping | 90 |
| Shipping Law | 85 |
| Limitation of Liability | 75 |
| Letter of undertaking | 70 |
| Tonnage limitation | 60 |
| Arbitration | 30 |
| Contract Law | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Civil Procedure