inter-club agreement, charterparties, New York Produce Exchange Agreement Home Publications Articles Inter-Club Agreement: the Right to Counter Security Inter-Club Agreement: the Right to Counter Security Publications Joanne Sharma Published: January 11, 2019 Contact author Download article pdf     Image The recent London Arbitration Award 18/18 highlights the need for care to be taken over the precise wording of clauses used in charterparties to incorporate the Inter-Club New York Produce Exchange Agreement 1996, as amended September 2011 (“ICA 2011”). Facts The vessel was chartered from the claimant, a Disponent Owner, to the Charterer on an amended NYPE 1946 form with additional riders. The charterparties between Head Owners, Disponent Owners and Charterers were said to have been on essentially back-to-back terms.  Each charter read:  “P&I Club/Cargo Claims  “… Liability for cargo claims, as between Charterers and Owners, shall be apportioned/settled as specified by the Interclub New York Produce Exchange Agreement effective from 1996 and its subsequent amendments.” Cargo interests raised a cargo claim against Head Owners alleging damage amounting to US$900,000.  Following a threat of arrest, the Club for Head Owners provided security in the form of a letter of undertaking.  The Head Owners demanded that Disponent Owners provide counter-security pursuant to clause 9 of the ICA 2011 which they considered to be incorporated into the charterparty.  Clause 9 of the ICA 2011 provides: “If a party to the charterparty provides security to a person making a Cargo Claim, that party shall be entitled upon demand to acceptable security for an equivalent amount in respect of that Cargo Claim from the other party to the charterparty, regardless of whether a right to apportionment between the parties to the charterparty has arisen under this Agreement ...” Disponent Owners in turn made a request of Charterers to provide counter-secur