Plaintiff disponent owner chartered the vessel out for a voyage. When the vessel arrived at the port of discharge, the charterer had not yet paid the freight and demurrage in full. Then the disponent owner discharged the cargo and charged a lien over the same through its local agent. Defendant cargo owner tried to take delivery of the cargo, but the disponent owner’s local agent refused to release the cargo. Thus the cargo owner applied for and acquired from the court the maritime injunction, against which the disponent owner’s local agent had to release the cargo. The disponent owner filed a lawsuit with the court to allege that the cargo owner’s application for and acquisition of maritime injunction interfered its lien and it should compensate the disponent owner’s loss of lien, i.e. the unpaid freight and demurrage. The court rejected the disponent owner’s claim, by reason that under Chinese law, the applicable law in this case, the disponent owner had no legal ground to charge the lien over the cargo belonging to the cargo owner for the debts owed by the charterer, and it could not merely rely on the charter-party terms to charge the lien; further, the cargo owner was not the payee of the outstanding freight and demurrage under the charter-party, and the disponent owner was not the carrier of the cargo, so there was no legal relationship between the parties, which could entitle the disponent owner to charge the lien over the cargo.