UK: FOB Contract - Rights and Obligations of Buyer and Seller Re-Examined

Last Updated: 21 September 2010
Article by Patric McGonigal

A trading dispute under an FOB contract provides the opportunity to clarify a number of issues including the role of local custom in the nomination of a port,  whose right it is to nominate a loading place within a port, the nomination of a vessel incapable of loading at the original loading place and the nomination of a vessel incapable of performing the shipment.

On 9 February 2010, Mr Justice Steel issued a ruling in an application for leave to appeal two arbitration awards arising out of a series of disputed contracts for deliveries of "white refined sugar" on the London International Financial Futures and Options Exchange, Euronext LIFFE, under the White Sugar Futures Contract No. 4071.

The ruling is of interest given that it concerns the rights and obligations of parties to an FOB contract, in particular in relation to the applicability of local practices and the right to nominate a loading port (including a loading place within that port) as well as nomination of vessels incapable of performing.

As the court's ruling concerned a request for leave to appeal, on various issues of law, awards made by a Refined Sugar Association arbitration panel, there is little in terms of the background to these disputes. However, it is known that the parties entered into a series of contracts for the sale and purchase respectively of quantities of sugar through their clearing brokers with LCH Clearnet Limited. Lots were tendered for the physical delivery of sugar from Thailand and disputes subsequently arose under the relevant contracts.


Four issues of law were raised in the request for leave to appeal by the sellers:

  1. Are local customs and practices relevant to the determination of parties' obligations to nominate a loading port or place under an FOB/FOB stowed contract?
  2. Under an FOB contract giving the seller the right to nominate a port, is it the seller or the buyer which has the legal right (and duty) to nominate a loading place within that port?
  3. May a vessel nominated under an FOB contract be substituted by a vessel incapable of loading at the original loading place?
  4. "Ghost Nominations": is a seller in repudiatory breach of contract if it declines to accept a vessel nominated under an FOB contract which has already been fixed to a third party and is therefore incapable of performing at the time the seller is called on to accept it?

1. Relevance of Local Customs

The customs in question are those which are in use by Thai shippers (i.e. "Thai terms") which provide for loading at a berth at Bangkok and any topping up to be carried out at a second Thai port. The nominated loading port was "Bangkok/Kohsichang" and the sellers argued that this meant loading at Bangkok with any topping off at Kohsichang anchorage. The buyers said that they were entitled to take delivery in Kohsichang alone and no such custom should apply.

The tribunal disagreed with the sellers on the basis that, as regards the custom of the trade, the correct factual matrix was that of the London futures market and not the market relating to physical exports from Thailand. In any event, for the purposes of the LIFFE Exchange Contract, Bangkok/Kohsichang was deemed a single port and a custom of Bangkok port could not by definition be a custom of the deemed port. Moreover, it was not accepted either that the Thai terms did constitute an invariable practice or that the sellers' interpretation of those terms was even correct.

In any event, the court did not disagree and instead disputed whether this was an issue of law as opposed simply to one of factual matrix.

2. Right to Nominate a Loading Place Within a Port

The sellers contended that the tribunal was wrong to hold that "the right of choice of the loading place is that of the buyer and the seller can take no action which will have the effect of undermining or defeating that right."

In considering the issue, the court noted a number of the practical considerations which surround this issue. These included the prospect that, if the sellers nominated Bangkok/Kohsichang, the buyers could nominate a vessel which was too large to enter Bangkok but not the Kohsichang anchorage. Consequently, the sellers, on their case, could nominate a berth in Bangkok which the buyers' vessel could not reach and therefore arguably override the true meaning of Bangkok/Kohsichang.

The point was first addressed in the context of the incorporation of the ASSUC Rules into the Exchange Contract as well as the annexation of the Administrative Procedures to the Exchange Contract. However, the court agreed with the tribunal that, firstly, the section in the ASSUC Rules relied upon by the sellers was not in fact incorporated and, secondly, the Administrative Procedures provided for details of the vessel's tonnage (including the tonnage to be loaded) to be advised when the vessel nominated, and this therefore necessarily restricted the berths to those which were suitable to the vessel.

Of perhaps more interest - albeit that this situation is thought unlikely to arise very often in practice2 - is that the court also considered the issue on the basis of its understanding of the law and general practice in circumstances where there is no express option in either party's favour to nominate a berth. The court acknowledged that the volume of authority identified by the tribunal as being in support of the buyers' case was modest but nevertheless held it to be correct. Specifically, the court endorsed the reference to Boyd v Louca3 in which Kerr J stated that "...when nothing is expressly agreed and where there is no custom...from which any particular conclusions can be drawn, the choice of the loading port under an FOB contract is that of a Buyer if the contract leaves it open at what port shipment is to be made." Similarly, in Benjamin on Sale of Goods4, the court made reference to where it is stated that "if the contract does not specify which party is to nominate the berth, it is submitted that the right and duty of doing so is the Buyer's."

As regards any practical difficulties, it would not be too hard to envisage circumstances in which, regardless of which party was said to have the right to nominate, the other might be said to be inconvenienced and vice versa.  In short, given the court's earlier ruling on the lack of any relevant custom and the absence of any term dealing with the nomination of a berth or anchorage, it seems the court had little difficulty in agreeing with the tribunal that, in the case of an FOB contract, it is for the buyers to nominate the place of delivery.

3. Substitution by Vessel Incapable of Loading at Original Loading Place

It is understood that the third issue concerned the substitution of "non-Bangkok compliant" vessels in place of vessels that were "Bangkok-compliant" such that loading would instead have to take place at Kohsichang. The sellers' main concern presumably being that by having to arrange for shipment by barge to anchorage rather than loading at berth, significant additional costs would be incurred.

The court dealt with this issue in one paragraph, holding that the tribunal was clearly correct to conclude that: (a) where substitution is permitted without any requirements in terms of size and characteristics, the only physical requirement is that the new nominated vessel is suitable for the loading and carrying of sugar; (b) any prejudice the sellers may suffer in having to load at Kohsichang anchorage rather than berth in Bangkok may be compensated by exercising their right to recover costs incurred as a result of the substitution; and (c) as discussed above, "Bangkok/Kohsichang" is a single port and, therefore, there could not be any objection on the ground that a loading place had already been nominated (i.e. no new loading place was being nominated and the right of substitution remained expressly open).

4. Ghost Nominations

The final issue concerned the practice in the sugar trade of an FOB buyer nominating a vessel which at the time of nomination was fixed to a third party and therefore incapable of performing the shipment. The sellers argued that, in refusing to accept such a nomination, they were not in repudiatory breach of contract. The buyers said that, as they were entitled, if necessary, to substitute whatever vessel was nominated, it was not improper to nominate a vessel which was working elsewhere at the time, thereby allowing the buyers the time to finalise their loading arrangements in what may have been a difficult freight market.

The tribunal disagreed and held that, given the right of substitution and the right to recover in respect of any losses which were sustained, the sellers were not entitled to decline what were valid nominations. Moreover, there was no requirement on the part of buyers to charter other vessels knowing that they would also be rejected as being "non-Bangkok compliant."

The court concluded that the tribunal's findings on these issues could not be challenged and that, even if there was any serious doubt as to the effect of declining the nomination of vessels which were not in any event available to perform, the sellers could still properly be treated as being in anticipatory breach of contract. As such, a finding on either ground would not substantially affect the rights of the parties.

Ultimately, leave to appeal the awards was refused on all grounds.


The practical consequences of this ruling may be viewed as being harsh on the sellers, particularly in circumstances where matters were determined by reference to the expectations of the London futures market and not the market relating to physical exports from Thailand (with which both the first sellers and end buyers would have been familiar). However, the reality is that an equally convincing case for hardship could have been advanced by the buyers had the ruling gone the other way. Ultimately, in assessing the balance of convenience between the parties, the court has come down on the side of the FOB buyers on the basis that it is they who shoulder the burden of having to arrange for transport of the goods, whereas the sellers merely have to make their cargo available on time for shipment. As such, the options in relation to delivery of the goods to the ship are the buyers', except where the contract otherwise states.  

BLG represented UBS' interests in the matter.

This article was first published in Maritime Risk International, April 2010


1. (1) Cargill International SA; (2) Eagle Trading Limited (sellers) v (1) ED&F Man Sugar Limited (buyers); (2) Sucden Financial Limited; (3) UBS Clearing and Execution Services Limited; and (4) LCH Clearnet Limited [2009] Folios 1170 & 1171

2. We suspect that, in most cases, the place of delivery or berth will be selected by the relevant harbour authority and not the parties (albeit that the vessel's characteristics will be taken into account)

3. David Boyd & Co Ltd v Luis Louca [1973]

4. (7th) Edition) page 1691

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.