Ocean Neptune, demurrage, time bars, laytime, contracts Home Publications Articles The 'Ocean Neptune' - Demurrage Claims - again! The 'Ocean Neptune' - Demurrage Claims - again! Publications Steamship Mutual Published: May 23, 2018 Contact author Download article pdf Image In Lukoil Asia Pacific Pte Limited V Ocean Tankers (Pte) Limited (The Ocean Neptune) [2018] EWHC 163 (Comm) MJ Popplewell clarified whether a claim for time lost waiting for orders should be considered a demurrage claim. In addition, the judgment gave further clarification on the interpretation of demurrage time bars. For background on the importance of complying with demurrage time bars please refer to the Club’s previous articles: The Adventure - Perils of Demurrage Time Bars ,  Beware Demurrage Time Bars and Documentation (Part II) , and Demurrage Timebars - The Tide is Turning on “Sabrewing” . Facts By means of a fixture recap dated 8 November 2013 Lukoil Asia Pacific Pte Limited voyage chartered the tanker “Ocean Neptune” from Ocean Tankers (Pte) Limited for carriage of clean petroleum products from one safe port Taiwan to one to three safe ports Australia. The recap incorporated the ExxonMobil VOY2005 form and the Lukoil International Trading and Supply Company (“LITASCO”) Clauses, both of which were amended and supplemented in the fixture recap. Notice of readiness was tendered at the port of Mailiao (Taiwan) on 17 November 2013 and the hoses were disconnected two days later. Thereafter the vessel proceeded to the first discharge port, Gladstone (Australia), where NOR was tendered on 2 December 2013. The ship remained at berth between 3 and 5 December 2013, when she shifted to the anchorage. The vessel remained at the anchorage until 15 January 2014, when the vessel was ordered to proceed to Botany Bay (Australia). The delay at Gladstone was caused by the refusal of the cargo receivers to accept delivery of the cargo due to alleged contamination. The vessel discharged part of the rema