Menu:
Filepath: Intertanko / About Us / History / THE INTERNATIONAL TANKER OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION 1934-1970 Friday, September 10 2010



Forgot password?

Issues
Air emission/Annex VI
Air emission/GHGs
Bunkers
Chemical
Environment
Clarifying China’s marine pollution regulations effective from 1 March 2010 Seventh annual shipping industry Tripartite meeting in Beijing IMO acts on marine noise pollution and ship strikes on whales Whale and Cetacean Conservation USCG Environmental Awareness Sewage Regulations VECS (Vapour Emission Control Systems) Environmental Projects Environmental Organisations Environmental Bulletins IMO Meeting Papers North American Issues Pollution Prevention Air Emission Antifouling paints Reception Facilities Ballast water
Human Element
Insurance
Legal and Documentary
Anti-trust/Competition Law Case Summaries
Achilleas – House of Lords gives certainty on damages for late redelivery Acina - Shelltime 4 Afrapearl – Court of Appeal reverses first instance decision 'Alaska' - New York Arbitration 'Alsternstern' - The more hazardous the cargo, the more difficult to show seaworthiness Ambor/Once (the) - time charter - last voyage - Shelltime 4, Clause 19 considered Aniara - Charterers may cancel if tendering improper Archimidis – decision of the English High Court and Court of Appeal Asbatankvoy Clause 8 - New York arbitration Cape Horn - guarantee on behalf of charterers’ holding company Count (the) - High Court - safe port warranty Diamond Park and Emerald Park – vetting issues discussed Doric Pride – vessel detained by U.S. authorities Elli and Frixos – decision of the English High Court Front Commander - Court of Appeal decision Golden Victory - House of Lords - assessment of damages Halki - Arbitration Clause - Construction - Application for stay of proceedings Halki - Case law update - Court of Appeal decision 'Happy Day' - Allows owners' appeal and restores the award of the arbitrators 'Happy Day' - Glencore Grain Limited v Flacker Shipping Limited Happy Day - NOR 'Hill Harmony' - Court of Appeal upholds High Court decision on master's right to choose the route Hill Harmony - House of Lords - Master cannot ignore charterer's order on to the route to be taken - Court of Appeal Kriti Akti – Court of Appeal affirms High Court decision – Shelltime 3 – length of charter Li Hai – withdrawal from hire Liepaya - Recent English case law: Failure to give adequate notice of redelivery Loss not in parties’ contemplation Marika M - Whether vessel off-hire during period of repair Masters can decide route – recent decision of the English High Court Motis Exports - Court of Appeal upholder High Court decision - forged Bill of Lading New York arbitration decision – Asbatankvoy – foreseeability Nikmary - English Court of Appeal decision Obo Venture - Claims Clause Panalpine - What if English law had applied ? Paragon – unenforceable penalty for late redelivery Peter Schmidt - Asbtatankvoy - Validity of NOR Peter Schmidt - Demurrage/laytime recent case law English Commercial Court Protank Orinoco - Cargo Retention Clause Ruhr Ore - Recent New York Arbitration decision - lightering/crew rest periods Sabrewing - Demurrage Time Bar Clauses Seaflower - High Court - Rights of cancellation under vetting clause Stolt Spur - Vessel under multiple charters Voltaz - Whether demurrage claim time barred
Charter Party Advice Charter Party forms Charterers Clause EU Ship Source Pollution Directive litigation INTERTANKO Chartering Publications INTERTANKO Model Clauses INTERTANKO’s Freight and Demurrage Information Pool Law of the Sea: the challenge of unilateral measures v. uniform rules London Arbitration New ‘At A Glance’ Guide to pollution legislation Questions & Answers - various charterparties Tanker Chartering Seminars Useful links Washington State litigation
Marine safety
Navigation
Phase out
Piracy
Ports and Terminals
Research and Projects
SECA
Security
Abbreviations related to security Access of public authorities, emergency response and pilots Common approach by Round Table partners Company Security Officers (CSOs) – guidelines on training and certification Compliance on 1 July 2004 Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR) Crew Visas Declaration of Security (DOS) European Union Excessive terminal and crew restrictions Global integrated shipping information (GISIS) database IMO guidance for implementation of the ISPS Code Interface with FPSO/FSUs Interim certification INTERTANKO involved in piracy awareness training initiative in the Philippines INTERTANKO Model Clauses INTERTANKO Security Bulletin INTERTANKO to share security information with U.S. Coast Guard ISPS Code requirements for exercises Joint industry feedback form on maritime security Joint industry submissions to MSC79 Long Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) Maritime Security into STCW Minimum requirements for the issue of certificates of proficiency for SSOs Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circulars (NVICS) North American Issues Obligation to notify flag states when exercising control and compliance measures Seafarers’ Identity Documents (SIDS) Security cost reflected in the 2006 Worldscale schedule Security included in STCW Convention Ship Security Alert System (SSAS) Ship security officer (SSO) Shore leave and access to ships Special Purpose Ships (SPS) Submission of vessel/facility security plan under MTSA Suppression of Unlawful Acts (SUA) – new protocols adopted The final rule Timely ISPS Code compliance U.S. standardises ID requirements for officials accessing vessels or facilities US ports - security status USCG USCG releases Port Security Advisory on port facility security in Haiti Voluntary self-assessment by SOLAS Contracting Governments and port facilities Voluntary self-assessment checklist for Companies and CSOs
Technical
IACS CSR tracking database goes on line Protective coatings of dedicated seawater ballast tanks required in all types of ships and double-sided skin spaces of bulk carriers Means of Access INTERTANKO Model Clauses Technical Projects IMO Meeting Papers USCG INTERTANKO/OCIMF/Class Discussions North American Issues Bunkering - general Bunker Alerts Air Emissions Tank Level and Pressure Monitoring (TLPM) Systems Tanker Specification Awareness Guide Transparency Protection of Bunker Tanks FPSOs and FSUs - MARPOL Annex I Requirements Goal Based Standards Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) Newbuilding Standards: Extended guarantee/net-scantlings/corrosion margins Generic vs. ship specific corrosion allowances for existing ships Coating on cargo tanks
TOTS - An Introduction & Frequently Asked Questions
Vetting & Port State Control
Worldscale
 
Regions
Asia
Europe
North America
 
Benchmarking
Vessel Inspection Questionnaire (VIQ)
TMSA2
Crew & Officer Retention
Lost Time Indicator (LTI)
 
Databases
Confidential Accident Reporting Platform (CARP)
Human Element Landscape Database
Inspection Feedback Databases
Port Information
Questionnaire 88
STS Database
Terminal Vetting Reports & Terminal Satisfaction Sheets
 
Various
Annual Events
Committees, councils and regional panels
IMO submisssions
Intertanko Presentations
Intranet (Staff Only)
Maritime Industry Knowledge Centre
Poseidon Challenge
Tanker Issues A-Z
Weekly NEWS
 
 
Mail present page to a friend Print present page

THE INTERNATIONAL TANKER OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION 1934-1970
Published: 12 January 2001 00:00
Updated: 05 July 2006 17:03

Who could then have envisaged that the modest 3,000 ton capacity “giant” as it was then perceived would grow to the oil carrying leviathans of up to half million ton capacity which exist today. But then who could have forecast the need? Powered flight did not exist, nor did the motor car. Pollution concerns in the major cities centred on outflow from horses. Trains and ships ran on King Coal.

All this was soon to change and enterprising ship owners caught the mood. Oil companies like Standard Oil of USA - later to be broken up into competing entities - developed their fleets, and so did some independent shipowners, seeing an opportunity in this trade as in all others.

All did not always go well for these investors and the vagaries of the market, as they always do, produced down swings as well as up. The Wall Street Crash of 1929 and sharp drop in economic activity world-wide which followed led to unemployment and dropping freight rates for tankers.

The tanker industry has largely avoided “Conferences”, the co-operation agreements of the type which operate in the scheduled liner trade. Tanker chartering is cited by economists as one of the very few examples of “perfect competition” - the price is set purely by negotiation between buyer and seller of the service without regulation of outside bodies or rules. Thus, when supply of tankers exceeds demand for them, there is nothing to stop the price negotiated by the customers - the charterers - being driven right down to the floor.

The early 1930’s was such a time for the tanker owners, and adversity led them to explore ways to co-operate. An enterprising citizen of Liverpool whose own produce brokerage had been a victim of the 1929 Crash, H.T.Schierwater, had joined British tanker owner United Molasses, later to develop into Athel Line, first in its Liverpool office and then in London.

Schierwater pioneered a plan to even the tanker supply-demand balance by cutting the number of tankers available to trade. The Schierwater Plan involved laying up - mothballing - surplus tankers under the scheme. The tankers which remained in trade would, from the expected higher freight returns, contribute ten percent of their freight income to reward the owners of ships put into lay-up. The Plan was given additional bite because the oil company charterers, concerned that the quality of the tanker stock should not fall due to underfunding, supported it and gave charter preference to ships entered into the scheme.

The seeds of a co-operation between independent owners led on to other opportunities to work together, and on February 28 1934 the International Tanker Owners’ Association was inaugurated, with Schierwater its first Chairman, “to establish a medium for tanker owners to exchange information and opinions and to deal with the oversupply of tanker tonnage which depressed the market at the time” as shipowner Erling Næss reflected in his autobiography.

The Schierwater Plan was the first such scheme of active co-operation amongst tanker owners to work. Although attempts were made to repeat its formula, no other scheme had the same results. Whether its success was due to the participation of all parts of the industry, the forbearance of United States’ anti-trust authorities, or the recovery of economic activity and then the onset of Hitler’s War in 1939 is open to debate.

Post-war the massive reduction of tanker tonnage through sinking led to good times for tanker owners shipping oil from America and the Middle East to power the rebuilding of Europe. The Association was reassembled in 1949 by Mr Schierwater, and elected R.R.S.(Reginald) Cook of Hunting & Son, Newcastle, as its Chairman, which post he held until 1967. The Association continued to meet but in times of prosperity the meetings were more social than businesslike. Dinners, and golf matches between Britain and Norway.

Despite the apparent success of the Schierwater Plan, there had been considerable doubts amongst some owners about its market effects. The continuing opposition resulted in 1955 in the Association, which was the Plan’s custodian, decided that a seventy-five percent vote of members in favour would be required to revive a lay-up plan. In 1956 Egypt’s Colonel Nasser nationalised the Franco-British Suez Canal, and it closed, vastly increasing the length of tanker voyages from the Middle East oil wells to industrial Europe, and back again in ballast. Increased demand for tanker service brought good times but in 1957 the Canal opened again, now under Egyptian control and the freight market fell away.

By 1962 after several years of poor freight rates the Association was actively discussing a fresh lay-up plan modelled on Schierwater. The International Tanker Recovery Scheme was offered to owners and to the oil companies to improve conditions in the industry. The European oil companies - British Petroleum and Shell - were ready to back the scheme as the oils had backed Schierwater but this time the Americans were having none of it. Nonetheless the Association pressed on with the plan and at its peak in Summer 1964 some 80 tankers (1.5 million tons of carrying capacity) were in lay-up under the scheme. However the lay-up was short-term and seasonal and all these ships left lay-up to trade in Winter 1964-.65. In 1967 the Suez Canal was again closed by the Arab-Israel war.

Lay-up schemes were not the only objective of the Association. Erling Næss and the Norwegian shipowner Jørgen Jahre promoted a Shipbuilders and Shipowner Collaboration Scheme in the 1960’s in an attempt to limit building of surplus tankers. The European shipbuilders were ready to support the scheme but the Far East builders - dominated by the Japanese - who were busy establishing themselves as the controlling force in world shipbuilding were unwilling to back it and it failed.

The Association was active in attempts to harmonise safety requirements for tankers and to standardise equipment needs in different oil ports and terminals. These were the days before a true international body for maritime affairs. The United Nations was only brought into being late in the 1940’s. The Convention creating the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation, the forerunner of the International Maritime Organization, IMO, was drawn up in 1948 but not brought into effect until 1958-59. Shipping traffic was regulated by national rules and occasional bipartite treaties. The need for world-wide agreement on ship operation and equipment for a class of ship trading in a hazardous product to all corners of the world was readily apparent to the Association.

Following the stranding of the tanker Torrey Canyon on the British coast in 1967, and outcries about clean-up of oil spills and compensation for the victims of the pollution, discussions started amongst tanker owner to form a voluntary agreement accepting liability and providing compensation funds, through insurance. The International Tanker Owners’ Association was active in these discussions which led to the creation of the Tanker Owners’ Voluntary Agreement concerning the Liability for Oil Pollution, or TOVALOP.

The International Tanker Owners’ Association was headquartered in London, signifying the continued strength of the British merchant fleet. Its membership was international but the leading positions were those of the British tanker owners - Hunting’s of Newcastle, Athel Line, P.& O., and Erling Næss’ Anglo Nordic. Stewart Browne of Athel Line, Vice-Chairman under Mr Cook, continued to serve as Vice-Chairman until the Association closed in London and Jan Hudig, Jørgen Jahre and Erling Næss, all later to become Chairmen in Oslo, were on the Association’s Council.

The Association worked closely with the leading bodies of British shipping and with the London-based oil companies. Indeed when in the 1960’s the senior manager in BP’s shipping operations, Houston Jackson, retired from BP he was signed to Hunting’s and elected Chairman of the Association in succession to Mr Cook. Many of the British members were liner companies with tanker departments or sections closely monitored by the United Kingdom Chamber of Shipping. This led the more specialist tanker owners to become restless and concerned that other interests were limiting the effectiveness of the Association.

The 1967 closure of the Suez Canal had rendered the Recovery Scheme unnecessary. The Association’s agenda had therefore shrunk. The opportunity arose for these independent tanker owners to recreate the Association on finer lines and with more independence from other influences. Although some of the Association’s members resisted it - the London ones particularly vigorously - the Association was wound up in London and, largely inspired by Jørgen Jahre, INTERTANKO, the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners, opened in Oslo at an inaugural meeting on October 21 1970.


Search
Quick search
Advertisement