Contract analysis

1. Executive Summary The purpose of this memorandum is to analyse the enforcement options available to our client, Thalassa Shipping & Logistics SA ("TSL"), in the Republic of Singapore against Korinthian Maritime Holdings Ltd. ("KMH") and its Singapore subsidiary, Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. ("Korinthian Bulkers"), in respect of LCIA Award No. 224718 dated 28 June 2024 (the "Award"). The Award was rende

2. Background 2.1 The Underlying Dispute and Award The Parties. TSL is a Greek-incorporated société anonyme (Anonymos Etairia), domiciled and registered in Piraeus, Greece (AFM EL-801456729). TSL operates a fleet of 34 vessels, predominantly dry-bulk carriers and tankers, and reported annual revenues of approximately €620 million for the financial year ended 31 December 2023. TSL is privately held, with 72% of its sh

3. Recognition and Enforcement Under the International Arbitration Act (Cap. 143A) 3.1 Legal Framework The New York Convention and the IAA The Republic of Singapore is a signatory to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958). The Convention is given the force of law in Singapore through the International Arbitration Act (Cap. 143A) ("IAA"), which was originally enact

Section 19 — Enforcement of Awards

Section 19 of the IAA provides that a foreign arbitral award may, with the leave of the High Court, be enforced in Singapore in the same manner as a judgment or order of the court to the same effect. Upon grant of leave, the Award may be entered as a judgment of the court, and all remedies available to enforce a judgment become available to enforce the Award. This includes, critically, execution against assets in Sin

Section 29 — Grounds for Refusal

Section 29 of the IAA sets out the grounds on which recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award may be refused. These grounds mirror Article V of the New York Convention and are as follows: (a) Section 31(2): The court may refuse enforcement if the party against whom enforcement is sought proves that: (i) a party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity, or the arbitration agreement was not

4. Admiralty Arrest of M/V *Crimson Horizon* 4.1 Basis for Admiralty Jurisdiction Statutory Framework. The admiralty jurisdiction of the Singapore High Court is governed by the High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap. 123) ("HCAJA") and Order 70 of the Rules of Court. The HCAJA is modelled on the United Kingdom's Administration of Justice Act 1956 (now the Senior Courts Act 1981), and the Singapore courts have d

Section 3(1) of the HCAJA confers admiralty jurisdiction on the High Court in respect of a range of maritime claims. The claims relevant to the present case include, in particular: (a) claims arising out of any agreement relating to the carriage of goods in a ship or to the use or hire of a ship (section 3(1)(h)); and (b) claims for damage done by a ship (section 3(1)(d)), though this ground is less directly relevant

Section 4(4) of the HCAJA provides that an in rem action may be brought against a ship if the person who would be liable on the claim in an action in personam ("the relevant person") was, when the cause of action arose, the owner or charterer of, or in possession or in control of, the ship in connection with which the claim arose. However, under section 4(4)(b), where the action is to be brought against a different s

1. Court costs and Sheriff's expenses (including the costs of arrest, custody, appraisement, sale, and distribution);

2. Maritime liens (in order of their established priority: salvage, damage done by a ship, wages of master and crew, master's disbursements, bottomry and respondentia);

3. Possessory liens (for repairs, salvage, or storage);

4. Statutory liens arising from in rem claims (including the claims of the arresting party);

5. Unsecured claims. TSL's claim, as a judgment creditor enforcing an arbitral award arising from charter-party disputes, would rank as a statutory lien arising from an in rem claim. This means that TSL's claim would rank after maritime liens and possessory liens but ahead of unsecured creditors. Based on available intelligence, the risk of competing maritime liens ranking ahead of TSL's claim is assessed as low. How

5. Garnishee Proceedings Against Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd. 5.1 Legal Basis Order 49 of the Rules of Court A judgment creditor may apply under Order 49 of the Rules of Court for a garnishee order directed at a third party (the "garnishee") who is indebted to the judgment debtor. The purpose of the garnishee order is to attach the debt owed by the garnishee to the judgment debtor and to redirect payment of that de