Jody Wood is a partner at FZ in London.

Jody’s practice focuses on commercial litigation and international arbitration in the maritime, trade and aviation sectors. He brings extensive experience to the team, having been a Partner at a major international law firm in London and having practised in Singapore for nine years.

On the shipping and trade side, Jody’s experience includes MOA/sale and leaseback, charter-party, bill of lading, ship build/management and sale of goods matters in which he acts for owners, charterers, insurers, managers and traders.  Jody has significant experience of acting for banks, funds and other lenders in distressed debt/special situations, including the enforcement of loans and credit facilities secured by shipping assets and associated security.

On the aviation side, Jody’s experience includes foreclosures against aircraft in various jurisdictions, repossessions of detained aircraft, leasing disputes (airframes and engines) and maintenance, repair, and overhaul facility disputes.

Jody is a specialist and experienced arbitration practitioner and was appointed as a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (FCIArb) in 2017.

Outside work, Jody’s family keeps him busy, and he enjoys cycling, running, surfing and the odd glass of red wine.

Professional Experience

  • Partner, Floyd Zadkovich, London/UK (since 2023)
  • Partner, Reed Smith, London (2021-2023)
  • Counsel, Reed Smith, Singapore & London (2016-2020)
  • Senior associate, Reed Smith, Singapore (2013-2015)
  • Associate, HFW, Singapore (2010-2013)
  • Claims Executive, The Standard P&I Club, London & Singapore (2007-2010)

Education

  • Diploma in International Arbitration, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Singapore (2017)
  • Maritime Law Short Course, Southampton University, Singapore (2010)
  • Legal Practice Course, College of Law, Guildford, UK (2001-2002)
  • Law with French (LLB Hons), UWE, Bristol/UK (1997-2001)
  • The “Impecunious Claimant” and security for costs

    The “Impecunious Claimant” and security for costs

    Ceto Shipping Corporation v Savory Shipping Inc (The “Victor 1”) [2023] EWHC 2995 (Comm)

    There is certain bitter irony for a defendant when a claimant, who has spent a small fortune in legal proceedings against that defendant, turns around and pleads poverty when that defendant seeks security for costs.

    Such circumstances were considered in “The Victor 1”, where the Commercial Court considered a defendant’s security for costs application against a claimant which appeared, on paper, not to have any assets, but which seemed capable of funding litigation with seemingly bottomless pockets in numerous jurisdictions.[1]

    Under CPR 25.13, if the “claimant is a company or other body (whether incorporated inside or outside Great Britain) and there is reason to believe that it will be unable to pay the defendant’s costs if ordered to do so”, then the defendant will have a prima facie entitlement to security for costs.  However, the courts will weigh this entitlement up against key considerations of justice.

    [1] Ceto Shipping Corporation v Savory Shipping Inc [2023] EWHC 2995 (Comm).

  • London Arbitration 3/24: Time bar still too high a bar for claimants to get over  |  ZFZ Postcard Cases

    London Arbitration 3/24: Time bar still too high a bar for claimants to get over | ZFZ Postcard Cases

    London Arbitration 3/24 concerned a voyage concluded under a booking note dated 5 October 2021.   As readers will be aware, a booking note is issued to a shipper who books space for cargo onboard a ship. In Electrosteel Castings v Scan-Trans Shipping and Chartering, Gross J stated a booking note is intended to “embody the contract” agreed between the parties and “to continue in existence as the contract between them.”[i] This position is supported by the terms specified in the widely used CONLINEBOOKING note which states “[i]t is hereby agreed that this Contract shall be performed subject to the terms contained on Page 1 and 2 hereof which shall prevail over any previous arrangements …”.[ii]

  • WhatsApp-enned here?! Salutary lessons when negotiating subjects over social media | ZFZ Postcard Cases

    WhatsApp-enned here?! Salutary lessons when negotiating subjects over social media | ZFZ Postcard Cases

    When emails became popular in business in the 1990’s, to a large extent replacing faxes and letters by post, it was difficult to foresee how things could get any quicker. However, with the advent of social media into the fast-paced world of broking, and the arrival of WhatsApp, communication by email, it seemed, was just too slow.

    WhatsApp messages are now regularly used for the negotiation of charterparties. However, the difficulties start when the charterparty falls apart. As many times as one party produces the messages as evidence of the contract, the other party argues that they are merely informal or unverifiable communications that should be given no value by a court or tribunal in considering contract formation.

  • Jody Wood on the Judicial Sale of Ships

    Jody Wood on the Judicial Sale of Ships

    The Beijing Convention provides a framework for the rights and obligations of stakeholders following judicial sale of ships, whether that be by judicial auction or by way of private treaty. The framework increases protection for prospective purchasers of those ships, usually being sold in the context of enforcement of maritime claim proceedings. The clearly stated aim of the Convention is to realise better value for ships sold in distressed circumstances, on the basis that higher prices benefit debtors and creditors alike.

    In this update, we take a look at the main provisions of the Beijing Convention and what they mean for stakeholders in judicial sales of vessels.

    Read the full article here.