Where a written [charterparty] contract expressly ‘prohibits’ oral modifications through NOM clause, is an oral modification enforceable? In a fairly recent judgement UK Supreme Court (in a non-maritime case) has said “NO”.
Many charterparties contain commercially desirable ‘NOM’ clauses (no oral modification). Situations do arise where either owners or charterers act upon oral variations to their detriment. Above decision will have an impact on how arbitrators and courts in common law jurisdictions construe these clauses now.
Comments