June 12, 2021: Since the successful operation to dislodge the 220,000-ton Ever Given from the Suez Canal, where it was stuck for six days, the cargo ship has been grounded again – this time by a fierce legal battle between the ship’s owners, insurance companies, and the Suez Canal Authority.
Lemons, bamboo shoots and tofu sit in the sweltering heat, alongside goods from Lenovo, Ikea, Dixons Carphone and dozens of other brands – including barbecues, sun loungers, swimwear, lawn mowers and camping equipment – and will arrive at their intended destinations long after summer ends.
In late April, Egypt announced that authorities were detaining the ship, its 26 crew members and millions of pounds of cargo until its owners paid for the interruption.
Until the issue is resolved, the ship is unable to get out of Egyptian waters. “We are disappointed. Some of our clients are furious, “said Jay Sharma of insurance company Clyde & Co., which represents goods worth more than 100 million m on the board given to it. Although the cargo is officially in custody, it is physically damaged. Removal from a large ship is unlikely to be an option because such a large crane is needed to accommodate such a large ship in such a deep harbor.
Chinese technology makers Lenovo and Ikea have separately confirmed to Dixon Carphone that their products were stuck on board. A spokesman for Dixon Carfon said: “We have a large number of containers on a given vessel, but our stock level or business operations are not significant. Some retailers are considering legal action against Egyptian authorities for trying to free their goods. Lenovo’s Charlotte West said: “We are looking for ways to recover the goods, but he declined to give details.
A return to court in the Egyptian port city of Ismailia later this month has sparked a legal battle over compensation. The Suez Canal Authority said it was preparing $916illion from the UK-based club, the Shui Kasin and its insurers, to cover some of the savings incurred by cargo insurance companies.
While the SCA has since said it is ready to accept a 550 million settlement, it still has to provide information to explain its overwhelming demand, in addition to the “salvation bonus.” In addition to listing 300m for reputation damage” more “and physical damage to the canal. Egyptian authorities quietly revealed in late May that a man had died trying to escape.
“Even $550 is unreasonable Sharma said. “My impression is that the whole claim is false.” Clyde & Co. raised a particular issue regarding the size of the redemption bonus. “The SCA said with great enthusiasm that 800 Egyptians worked for six days to save the ship – the $300 million spread for 800 people working six days is a normal pay package,” he said. It’s hard to imagine what that means, “said Sharma.
The UK’s P&I Club said in April that “the SCA has not provided any justification for this unusually large claim.” The ship was re-launched six days later and the Swiss canal immediately resumed its commercial operations. Resumed operations. ” Observers are puzzled as to why the SCA has pressed for compensation for the damage done to its reputation, while further damaging global supply chains by degrading ships, crew and cargo. Dustin Ono of the UK’s P&I Club said: “In many ways, this event was an opportunity for Egypt to shine.
“The UK P&I Club acknowledged that the SCA helped to get rid of it, and it was successful within six days. It was a great achievement that the Egyptians should be proud of. And it draws a lot of attention to his tremendous contribution to world trade. I’m struggling to see why he thinks his reputation has been damaged.
Clyde & Co. wrote a letter to the SCA in May, asking it to consider whether some of the items on board could be unsold due to expiration, out-of-season, or delays. ۔ Clyde & Co. added that expired items could be a “major issue to deal with.” “We believe that if the SCA is reported to have refused to release sensitive cargo in a timely manner during an epidemic, such an assessment could cause significant damage to the SCA.” Clyde & Co. said it had received no response.
There has been little agreement since the ship landed. The possibility of low visibility due to strong winds and sandstorms was initially raised, but controversy remains because if the weather puts the ships at risk, the SCA will cut off the water supply.
Syed Syed Shisha, head of the SCA’s investigation committee into the incident, told reporters that Avery was being given faster and faster, and he blamed the ship’s captain. The SCA has ordered that two canal pilots be present on aircraft carriers of this size, to allow them to navigate the narrow waterway, but the canal rules hold any third party liable for any damage.۔
The UK’s P&I Club said it was “concerned” by the SCA’s claims against the ship’s captain, including that he was speeding. The speed of ships crossing the waterway is usually regulated as they travel in a caravan. “Although the master is ultimately responsible for the ship, navigation in the canal route within a convoy is controlled by the pilots of the Suez Canal and the SCA vessel traffic management services. This includes the availability of escort tugs, ”said the UK P&I Club.