Philippine maritime law: time bars and conditions precedent

Joseph Christian G del Rosario
Managing Partner, CDRP Law, Makati, Philippines
mail@cdrp-law.com

In the dispute resolution practice of law, practitioners should look out for prescriptive periods or limitations in the filing of their actions. In maritime law, these are referred to as time bars.

The following are the common time bars considered in the Philippine jurisdiction:

• Cargo claims – one year from the date of delivery of the cargo or when the cargo should have been delivered.
• Charter party disputes, shipbuilding, supplies, and similar contracts – ten years from the time the cause of action accrues.
• Collision – four years from the date of the incident as this will likely be based on torts.
• Maritime labour claims – three years from the time the cause of action accrued except for illegal dismissal which is reckoned at four years.
• Claims involving an arrastre operator are dependent on the terms of their Cargo Handling Contract with the port facility concerned. From experience, the time bar does vary but is usually a period of 12 months from the time the cause of action accrues.

For matters concerning arbitration, the following may be considered considering the discussion on time bars:

• petition for the enforcement or recognition of commercial maritime arbitral award – anytime;
• petition to set aside commercial maritime arbitral award – within three months from the time the petitioner receives a copy thereof.

Note that there is a principle on laches which is defined as ‘the failure or neglect for an unreasonable or unexplained length of time to do that which by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier warranting a presumption that he has abandoned his right or declined to assert it’.

One point to highlight when considering legal proceedings is the existence or non-existence of conditions precedent. In certain cases, there may be conditions precedent to initiating proceedings. Failure to comply with the conditions precedent will likely result in barring the party’s claim. Related to this point is that the rules of civil procedure in relation to the rules of procedure for admiralty cases require that compliance with conditions precedent be alleged in the initiatory pleading. It is submitted that case law has interpreted substantial compliance with the condition precedent to be sufficient for purposes of compliance.

As such, careful review of the situation and the related documents must be performed before initiating legal proceedings.

This article should not be construed as legal advice. If you have any actual or imminent disputes, it is best to contact a professional.

The author is the managing partner of CDRP Law and has been in the practice of maritime law for more than 20 years.