The scenario is a familiar one. A bunker trader delivers 800 tonnes of fuel oil to a bulk carrier calling at Fos, on the order of a time charterer based in Dubai. Thirty days later, the invoice remains unpaid and the charterer has stopped responding. The ship, meanwhile, is expected at Le Havre the following week. Can it be detained there even though its owner never ordered anything?
Who owes for the bunkers under the contract
The French Transport Code allocates the roles unambiguously. Under a time charter, the owner retains nautical management, while the charterer has commercial management and bears “all costs inherent in that commercial operation”, “in particular bunkers” (Articles R. 5423-12 and R. 5423-13). The supplier’s contractual debtor is therefore, in principle, the charterer. The supplier’s general terms and conditions sometimes change the picture: many name as jointly and severally liable buyers “the vessel, her owners, managers and charterers”. Such a clause does not bind an owner that has not accepted it, but it carries weight in the argument over whether the claim appears well founded.
The ship as security for the maritime claim
The 1952 Brussels Arrest Convention includes among maritime claims “goods or materials wherever supplied to a ship for her operation or maintenance” (Article 1(1)(k)). The creditor may arrest the particular ship in respect of which the claim arose, or any other ship owned by the person who was the owner of that ship when the claim arose (Article 3(1)). Where the demise charterer alone is liable for the claim, the creditor may arrest the chartered ship or any other ship owned by the charterer; the Convention extends this reasoning to other cases in which a person other than the owner is liable for the claim (Article 3(4)).
The Cour de cassation has defined the scope of this provision: the creditor may arrest the chartered ship as long as the charterer, which alone is liable for the claim, is operating it; arrest is no longer possible where, on the date of the application, the ship has been redelivered to its owner, unless the maritime claim is secured by a lien conferring a right to follow the ship (Cass. com., 19 November 2025, no. 24-11.520, published in the Bulletin). For a bunker supplier, timing therefore becomes decisive: the arrest must be made while the charter is running, or a lien must be established. The ship’s flag, the law governing the supply contract and the terms of the charterparty still need to be examined.
What makes the difference before the court
The enforcement judge (juge de l’exécution) rules on an ex parte application, without hearing the shipowner, and requires only a claim that appears well founded in principle (Article L. 5114-22 of the Transport Code). The speed of the measure is no excuse for a poorly kept file: delivery note signed by the chief engineer, order confirmation naming the ship, accepted general terms and conditions, proof of non-payment and of reminders. The “no lien” stamp applied by the master to the delivery note, common in European ports, does not extinguish the claim but weakens the argument that the ship itself is bound.
On the other side, the shipowner will seek release against security, then argue that the arrest was wrongful. An ill-founded arrest is costly for the arresting party (see the page on wrongful arrest). The stakes must therefore be weighed before the application is filed.
What the firm checks first
- The party that actually placed the order: time charterer, demise charterer, technical manager or owner.
- The general terms and conditions of sale and the law they designate.
- The delivery note: signature, ship’s stamp, “no lien” wording.
- The next port of call, the ship’s nationality and the date on which the charter ends.
- Whether the debtor owns other ships that can be arrested.
For the firm’s services, see Ship arrest.
Further reading
- Wrongful ship arrest: obtaining compensation for detention
- Release of an arrested ship: what to require from the P&I club letter of undertaking
- How can a ship be arrested in France to secure a claim?
This analysis is part of the firm’s work in maritime law.
Frequently asked questions
Can a bunker supplier arrest a ship whose owner ordered nothing?
Yes, as long as the ship is still chartered by the debtor: the 1952 Convention then allows the chartered ship to be arrested (Article 3(4)). After redelivery, arrest requires a claim secured by a lien conferring a right to follow the ship (Cass. com., 19 November 2025, no. 24-11.520).
Who pays for bunkers under a time charter?
The charterer, which bears the costs of commercial operation, “in particular bunkers” (Article R. 5423-13 of the Transport Code), unless the charterparty provides otherwise.
How long does it take to obtain permission to arrest?
From a few hours to two days, depending on the court. The useful time frame depends above all on how well the file has been prepared before the ship arrives.