On 28 September 1988, while the Frinton was sailing in the Indian Ocean bound for ports in the Far East, a fire was discovered in two of its holds. The vessel had loaded a cargo of steel bars in Recife, Brazil, between 12-19 August and a cargo of cotton bales in Buenos Aires, Argentina, between 30 August-5 September. On 11 November, the plaintiff cargo owners issued a writ in rem against the defendant owners and/or demise charterers of the Frinton. The claim was for damages for breach of contract by the defendants regarding the loading, stowage, handling, custody, care and discharge of the plaintiffs' cargoes, which resulted in loss and/or damage and/or delay. The Frinton was arrested in Hong Kong on 30 December 1988. The Frinton was then managed by a company called Pleiades Shipping Agents SA (Pleiades). It was found by the Court of First Instance that through their agent, Pleiades, the defendants' principal place of business was in Greece.

Sixty-nine bills of lading were being relied upon, 65 of which were on the Conlinebill form (those covering the bales of cotton) and four on the Congenbill form (those covering the steel bars). On 1 June 1989, the defendants sought an order that the proceedings instituted against them by the plaintiffs be stayed in favour of the Courts of Greece on the grounds that:

1. 15 of the 18 bills of lading under which the cargo was carried contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the Courts of Greece; and
2. In any event, the Courts of Greece were the forum in which this case could most suitably be tried for the interests of all the parties and for the ends of justice.

The matter came for hearing before Barnett J. The Judge refused to grant a stay of proceedings. The defendants appealed, and the plaintiffs sought to uphold the Judge's decision on additional or alternative grounds.

Held: Appeal allowed.

The Court of First Instance observed that the Hague Rules applied to all the bills of lading. Questions of seaworthiness might arise under art 3 and fault or privity on the part of the defendants under art 4. Thus, an important evidential role would be played by the management of Pleiades, particularly its technical and operations management and staff. The vessel's records would also be required. These witnesses and documents were in Greece. Further, some of the vessel's crew during the voyage in which the casualty occurred would be required as witnesses. They were Greek. It had been suggested that it would be more appropriate for them to give their evidence in their home port and in their own language.

This Court was also of the opinion that since a fire caused the damage out of which these claims arose, the most pertinent evidence was likely to concern the organisation and management of the operation of the Frinton by Pleiades in Greece. Article 4.2.b of the Hague Rules, which was also applied in Greece, provided that '[n]either the carrier nor the ship shall be responsible for loss or damage arising or resulting from ... (b) Fire, unless caused by the actual fault or privity of the carrier'.

Therefore, in order to explore the reason for the fire, it was fair and just that a stay be granted.