Damages for Detention

What it does

Damages for detention are the owner's remedy for delay to the vessel that falls outside the demurrage scheme. Demurrage is the agreed liquidated sum for time used beyond laytime during cargo operations; detention covers delay of a different character, such as time lost after a fixed demurrage period has run out, or delay caused by the charterer in breach of the charter where the demurrage clause does not reach.

Because detention is damages at large rather than a pre-agreed rate, the owner must in principle prove the actual loss suffered, although the demurrage rate is often used as evidence of the daily value of the ship's time. The distinction matters because the two remedies are triggered by different events, and where demurrage is capped or time-barred, detention may be the only route to recovery for the further delay.

Commercial effect

The line between demurrage and detention decides both how a delay claim is valued and whether it survives clauses that limit demurrage. Where a charter fixes a maximum number of demurrage days, delay beyond that point may convert into detention, and where a demurrage time bar has expired, a claim properly characterised as detention may sit outside it. The characterisation can therefore be worth a great deal.

For the charterer, detention is less predictable than demurrage because it is not a fixed daily figure and depends on proof of loss. For the owner, it is a safety net that captures delay the demurrage regime does not reach, but one that carries a heavier evidential burden. Both sides watch the boundary closely whenever delay extends beyond the ordinary cargo operations the demurrage clause was written for.

Owner's perspective

The owner relies on detention to recover for delay that the demurrage clause does not cover, particularly once a capped demurrage period has been exhausted or where the charterer's breach causes loss of time outside cargo handling. The owner will frame such delay as detention in order to escape limits and bars that attach specifically to demurrage rather than to delay in general.

The owner accepts that detention requires proof of actual loss and so keeps the records needed to establish the value of the lost time, often pointing to the demurrage rate as the natural measure. Clear evidence of the cause of delay and of the earnings forgone strengthens a detention claim that, unlike demurrage, cannot rely on a pre-agreed figure standing in for the loss.

Charterer's perspective

The charterer prefers delay to be dealt with as demurrage, where the rate is fixed and the exposure is known, rather than as detention with its open-ended damages. It therefore resists attempts to recharacterise ordinary cargo-operation delay as detention and looks for clear wording that channels delay claims through the demurrage regime and its protections.

Where detention genuinely arises, the charterer scrutinises the owner's proof of loss, since the burden lies on the owner to show the actual damage suffered. It also keeps in mind that a capped demurrage period or a time bar may push the owner toward a detention claim, and it drafts and reviews those provisions with that consequence firmly in mind.

Negotiation points

• Whether a maximum demurrage period is fixed, beyond which delay may convert into detention.
• Whether delay outside cargo operations is dealt with as demurrage or as detention.
• The evidence the owner must produce to establish loss for a detention claim.
• How demurrage time bars and caps are drafted, given that detention may fall outside them.

Common variations

• Detention arising after a fixed maximum number of demurrage days has been used.
• Detention for delay caused by the charterer outside the loading and discharging operations.
• A clause expressly extending the demurrage rate to periods of detention as the measure of loss.
• Wording channelling all delay through demurrage to exclude separate detention claims.