Maritime Arbitration and Mediation

The lawyers at Hohenstein & Parkinson, LLP provide cogent advice on the initiation and conduct of maritime arbitration and mediation. Our background includes extensive experience with both types of proceedings.

Maritime arbitration is a highly specialized advocacy skill given the particular context of such proceedings. These matters require knowledge not only of the unique procedures but also of the dynamics of the process. The firm also assists clients with any related litigation, such as petitions to compel arbitration and petitions to confirm, as well as actions for security related thereto.

Mediation arising from maritime disputes, particularly matters in litigation, requires a different skill set, since the process is different in tone and conduct from that of maritime arbitration. Our experience includes handling numerous mediations, many of which resulted in the termination or avoidance of litigation.

Maritime Arbitration and Mediation Inquiries

For additional information or to schedule a consultation, please call 917.873.2528 or send an email to

Representative Reported Decisions

In re Arbitration between Carina Int’l Shipping Corp. v. Adam Maritime Corp., 961 F. Supp. 559 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)(Charterer’s challenge to arbitration award on basis of alleged arbitrator’s misconduct failed. Award confirmed.)(Sotomayor, J.)

Chestnut Shipping Co. v. T-3 Freight, Ltd., 1995 WL 75485 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 1995)(In support of security for arbitration, permissible to attach judgment payment check in hands of opponent’s attorneys.)

In re M/T Aegean Glory, S.M.A. No. 4093, 2010 WL 4273250 (Sep. 30, 2010)(Charterer’s claim for damages to petroleum cargo rejected as evidence indicated cargo on-specification at discharge.)

In re M/T Promar, S.M.A. No. 4063, 2010 WL 424570 (Jan. 15, 2010)(Charterer’s claim of cargo contamination on board tanker rejected as evidence established shoreside fault.)

In re M/V Vikingbank, S.M.A. No. 3829, 2004 WL 5658878 (Feb. 11, 2004)(Charterer’s cancellation of charter wrongful. Owner entitled to substantial damages and attorneys’ fees.)

In re Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd., S.M.A. 3657, 2000 WL 35733831 (Dec. 26, 2000)(Based on breach of contract of affreightment, owner awarded damages for unperformed voyages as well as attorneys’ fees.)

Representative Engagements

The following matters illustrate the range of our experience:

  • Arbitration: Defended a shipper of perishable cargo from claims of a charterer arising from rejection of cargo by governmental authorities
  • Arbitration: On behalf of a time charterer, asserted claims against owner for breach of speed and consumption warranties
  • Arbitration: Representing a bill of lading holder, asserted claim against a shipowner relating to timing of tender of notice of readiness in context of sales price calculation dispute
  • Mediation: Successfully recovered economic loss damages for a utility related to outage of submerged electrical cable damaged by an anchor drag
  • Mediation: On behalf of a voyage charterer, resolved substantial demurrage claim asserted by the owner based on the condition of vessel at tender of the notice of readiness