The Statement of Facts is a document which can be central to many disputes between Owners and Charterers (and others) as this is the document where relevant facts are recorded and the sequence of events can be followed. At the same time, the statement of facts is not the “only truth” and will in some cases only be signed by one or more parties “for receipt only” to indicate that either the whole, or at least part, of the statement is not necessarily agreed to. If a dispute continues to litigation, the facts of what transpired at a given time may, however, be difficult to establish and it would certainly be costly to obtain either witness statements or even direct evidence by hearing relevant witnesses – sometimes a very long time after the event. It is therefore important to be aware of the way the courts and arbitration panels view a statement of facts. It is certainly not the case that a statement of facts is treated as being in any way “absolutely final”, but case law both before the ordinary courts and before arbitration panels has shown that the Statement of Facts is indeed treated as a very important piece of evidence. Most recently this was shown by the case concerning the “NEWFOREST”. This concerned a demurrage claim in the order of some USD 280,000 brought by the owners and relating to the unloading of iron ore in bulk in China. The dispute was about interruptions to lay time and demurrage and at least partly related to the true understanding and interpretation of a particular clause in the voyage C/P. The demurrage and dispatch clause provided that: “Demurrage and dispatch shall be calculated on the basis of the statement of facts made by Agent at loading and discharging port(s) entrusted by Owners and mutually confirmed by Master and LOADING PORT AUTHORITIES or DISCHARGING PORT AUTHORITIES.” There was also an exception to lay time running in that the clause also provided that stoppage caused by bad weather should not count as lay time. The owners claimed