{"id":6136,"date":"2026-03-30T09:43:47","date_gmt":"2026-03-30T01:43:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?p=6136"},"modified":"2026-03-30T09:43:48","modified_gmt":"2026-03-30T01:43:48","slug":"maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/","title":{"rendered":"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong><u>1. Summary and Facts:<\/u><\/strong><br><strong>Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd&#8217;s Rep 100<\/strong> concerns a dispute over the proper construction and interpretation of the <em>Clause 29 BARECON 2001<\/em>. Whereas, the claimant charterers had entered into a bareboat charterparty for the vessel of Songa Pride, which was governed by English law and subject to London Arbitration. Following a restructuring event affecting the guarantor, the charterers treated this as an event of default under <em>Clause 28<\/em> and terminated the charterparty with immediate effect. At the time of termination, the vessel was in Stockton, California. In which, the owners refused to repossess the vessel there and instead required the charterers to sail it to Trogir, Croatia, asserting that <em>Clause 29<\/em> entitled them to take possession at a location \u201cConvenient to them\u201d. The charterers complied under protest but later sought damages, arguing that the owners had breached their obligation to repossess the vessel promptly and appealed on the question of law as to the correct construction of <em>Clause 29<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><u>2. Legal Issues:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Whether <em>Clause 29<\/em> granted the owners an entitlement to require redelivery at any location they deemed convenient; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether <em>Clause 29<\/em> imposed a more limited obligation requiring repossession at or near the vessel\u2019s current location unless impracticable.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><u>3. Court\u2019s Findings:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed with the High Court Judge\u2019s reasoning. In which: <\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The court rejected the argument that <em>Clause 29<\/em> conferred an unfettered right on owners to choose any convenient location, noting that such a significant obligation on charterers would require clear and express wording.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It was held that the reference to a \u201cport or place convenient to them\u201d operates as a fallback mechanism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Accordingly, the correct construction is that owners must repossess the vessel at its current location unless prevented by practical constraints.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><u>4. Practical Implications:<\/u><\/strong><br>This judgment are significant as it limits the scope of owners\u2019 rights upon early termination and reinforces the principle which:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Introduce a good approach that reflects a reluctance to imply onerous obligations upon one party especially in contracts without clear contractual terms;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Promotes commercial fairness and reduces the risk of opportunistic behaviour by owners; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Highlights the importance of precise drafting in standard form contracts which requires it to be articulated in clear and unequivocal terms in certain circumstances.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>This case serves as a leading authority on the interpretation of repossession clauses in bareboat charters in which it will likely influence the judicial reasoning in future disputes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd&#8217;s Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel &#8211; not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6146,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3703],"tags":[3796,3700,3798,3797,3584,3737,3799],"class_list":["post-6136","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-maritime-shipping-law","tag-bareboat-charter","tag-charterparty","tag-clause-29-barecon","tag-contract-interpretation","tag-maritime-law","tag-shipping-disputes","tag-vessel-repossession"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd&#039;s Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel - not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ms_MY\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd&#039;s Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel - not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-03-30T01:43:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-30T01:43:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"630\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"YHA Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"YHA Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minit\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"YHA Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef\"},\"headline\":\"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-30T01:43:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-30T01:43:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":422,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/03\\\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif\",\"keywords\":[\"bareboat charter\",\"Charterparty\",\"clause 29 barecon\",\"contract interpretation\",\"Maritime Law\",\"shipping disputes\",\"vessel repossession\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Maritime &amp; Shipping Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/\",\"name\":\"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/03\\\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-30T01:43:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-30T01:43:48+00:00\",\"description\":\"In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd's Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel - not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/03\\\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/03\\\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":630},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\",\"name\":\"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\",\"description\":\"YHA Law Firm is a leading law firm in Malaysia.Specialises in handling Civil,Maritime,Shipping Matters,Company Law,Family Law,Real Estate and many more\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png\",\"width\":2080,\"height\":369,\"caption\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/yhalaw\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef\",\"name\":\"YHA Admin\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","description":"In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd's Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel - not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/","og_locale":"ms_MY","og_type":"article","og_title":"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","og_description":"In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd's Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel - not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.","og_url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/","og_site_name":"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw","article_published_time":"2026-03-30T01:43:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-03-30T01:43:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":630,"url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"YHA Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"YHA Admin","Est. reading time":"3 minit"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/"},"author":{"name":"YHA Admin","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/person\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef"},"headline":"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE","datePublished":"2026-03-30T01:43:47+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-30T01:43:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/"},"wordCount":422,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif","keywords":["bareboat charter","Charterparty","clause 29 barecon","contract interpretation","Maritime Law","shipping disputes","vessel repossession"],"articleSection":["Maritime &amp; Shipping Law"],"inLanguage":"ms-MY"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/","name":"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif","datePublished":"2026-03-30T01:43:47+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-30T01:43:48+00:00","description":"In Songa Product and Chemical Tankers III AS v Kairos Shipping II LLC [2026] 1 Lloyd's Rep 100, the Court of Appeal held that a clause allowing owners to repossess a vessel at a location \u201cconvenient to them\u201d does not entitle them to demand redelivery at any distant port of their choosing. The Court emphasised that repossession must occur as soon as reasonably practicable, and where the vessel is already at a safe and accessible port, owners cannot require charterers to incur the cost and risk of sailing it across the world. The decision clarifies that charterers, as gratuitous bailees post-termination, are only obliged to preserve the vessel - not to undertake burdensome repositioning for the owners\u2019 convenience.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ms-MY","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ms-MY","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif","contentUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/maritimelawport-jpg.avif","width":1200,"height":630},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-law-clauses-28-and-29-barecon-2001-owners-cant-pick-any-port-court-limits-convenience-in-vessel-repossession-clause\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"MARITIME LAW \u2013 CLAUSES 28 AND 29 BARECON 2001 \u2013 OWNERS CAN\u2019T PICK ANY PORT: COURT LIMITS \u2018CONVENIENCE\u2019 IN VESSEL REPOSSESSION CLAUSE"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#website","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/","name":"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","description":"YHA Law Firm is a leading law firm in Malaysia.Specialises in handling Civil,Maritime,Shipping Matters,Company Law,Family Law,Real Estate and many more","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ms-MY"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization","name":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ms-MY","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png","width":2080,"height":369,"caption":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/person\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef","name":"YHA Admin","sameAs":["https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6136"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6136"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6136\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6137,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6136\/revisions\/6137"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6146"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6136"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6136"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6136"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}