中文简介 >>

Kelly is a partner in the firm’s dispute resolution team.

He handles all manner of commercial disputes and in particular disputes involving clients in the trade and shipping industries. His practice includes cargo claims, bunker disputes, marine insurance, international trade, air transport claims, letter of credit disputes, freight forwarding disputes and ship chandler claims. He regularly acts for traders in all manner of disputes involving quality, shortage and cargo damage claims.

In the course of his practice, he has been involved in several notable shipping cases in the High Court and the Court of Appeal such as:

1. ZARKOVIC STANCO v OWNERS OF THE SHIP OR VESSEL “MARA” [2000] 4 SLR 156 where the Court of Appeal clarified that it was not a requirement that, to found jurisdiction under s. 3(i)(f) of the High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act, a claim for loss of life or personal injury must be based on fault.
   
   
2. PAN UNITED SHIPYARD PTE LTD v INDIA INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE PTE LTD [2000] 4 SLR 303 where the Court of Appeal construed the terms of an insurance policy, which was stated to be subject to the Institute Time Clauses for Builders' Risks, and whether the policy covered a claim by a third party whose yacht (which was in a nearby shipyard) was damaged because of the conversion works carried out to a bulk carrier (in the assured's shipyard) that was the subject of the policy.
   
   
3. THE BONITO [2001] 3 SLR 32 where the Court of Appeal clarified that a peremptory order has to be clear and unambiguous if it is to have any effect.
   
   
4. HUA SENG SAWMILL CO BHD v QBE INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD [2003] 4 SLR 449 where the High Court had to determine whether the loss of cargo onboard a barge fell within the insured peril of “washing onboard” in a marine insurance policy.
   
   
5. THE SUNRISE CRANE [2004] 1 SLR 300 where the High Court had to determine the scope of the duty of care with respect to dangerous goods. This was also Singapore’s first reported decision on tonnage limitation under the 1957 Convention.
   
   
6. PT Soonlee Metalindo Perkasa v Synergy Shipping Pte Ltd (Freighter Services Pte Ltd, third party) [2007] 4 SLR 51 where the High Court made a finding of fact on the vessel’s unseaworthiness which caused the loss of cargo. The High Court also had to consider whether the consignee was bound by the terms on the face of the bill of lading which had been incorporated into the contact of carriage by virtue of a quotation being signed by the consignee’s agent.  Finally, the High Court had to determine whether a third party was liable to indemnify the contractual carrier for the losses payable to the consignee.

The Asia Pacific Legal 500 (2008/2009 Edition) also states that Kelly provides 'very practical advice'