欢迎来海员网!没有海员的贡献世界上一半的人会受冻,另一半人会挨饿,关心海员,关爱海员,关注海员, 关注海员网www.ihaiyuan.com,属于中国海员自己的网站
海员网_海员之家_海员招聘网_船员网_船员之家_船员招聘网_中国海员网服务第一门户
政策问答
船员求职
船东招聘
证书查询
新闻综合
查询校企
关键字: 

《装卸时间与滞期费》第3章-装卸时间的起算-连载27

发布者:海员网|更新时间:2019-02-02 11:17:41|咨询可以加微信:cyfu01 | 174人评论)

我要求职 我要招聘 职务晋升 办海员证 培训招生 知识更新

  《装卸时间与滞期费》第6版

  CHAPTER 3 第3章

  Commencement of laytime 装卸时间的起算

  Additional requirements 额外附加规定要求

  3.197 There is, of course, nothing to prevent the parties to a charter from agreeing additional requirements that must be met before the ship concerned can be considered legally ready. The dif?culty in such cases usually comes from the fact that the additional requirement can only be met in one part of the port. The cases that follow illustrate this point.

  3.197当然,谁也无法阻止当事双方在合同中加入一些有关船舶在法律上被视为已准备就绪之前需要必须满足的附加要求条件。事实上,在这些案例中,争议的难点往往来自于只在一少部分港口才会遇到这种额外要求。下面这些案例即是对这种情况的说明。

  3.198 In The Freijo the principal clause dealing with the commencement of laytime contained a requirement that the vessel be in free pratique, which, as already mentioned, could only be obtained at inner anchorage. An additional clause, however, provided that, if through congestion the vessel was kept waiting off the port, then lay days were to commence as per the principal clause but not until 36 hours from arrival. Owing to congestion, the vessel was so delayed and a dispute arose as to whether the granting of free pratique was a condition precedent to the commencement of laytime under the additional clause.

  3.198 在The Freijo案,有关装卸时间起算的主要条款中包括了一项对船舶免检证书的要求,也就是前面所提到过的,只有船舶在内锚地才可获得。然而,还有一个附加条款,规定:如果由于港口拥挤而使船舶被迫在港外等候,那么,在等候36小时后,装卸时间即可起算。结果由于港口拥挤,该轮延迟了很久,于是,产生的一个争议是,根据附加条款,获取免疫证书是否是装卸时间起算的前提条件呢?

  3.199 However, the arbitrator, the High Court and the Court of Appeal were all agreed that it was not. What the charter contemplated was one of two things. Either the vessel was able to proceed at least as far as the inner anchorage, when free pratique would be a condition precedent, or it would be held up off the port, in which case the additional clause operated so that the only requirement was that 36 hours should elapse before laytime commenced. The reference to the principal clause in the additional clause was not intended to refer to the commencement of laytime.

  3.199 然而,仲裁员,高等法院和上诉法院,皆都认同这不是先决条件。在租船合同中考虑的是下面两种情况的其中一个,即要么是免疫证书作为前提条件,船舶就能够直接驶入,至少就此而言是内锚地;要么是附加条款所指的那种情况,船舶在港外停滞不前,这时,唯一的要求条件是在过了36小时之后即可开始起算装卸时间。其实,参照主要条款来看,在附加条款中并未提及装卸时间何时起算这一问题。

  3.200 A similar situation arose in The Puerto Rocca, this time concerning Customs clearance. Here the Puerto Rocca was inward bound to Liverpool with a cargo of grain on a berth charter, with a clause providing for time to count ‘‘whether in berth or not’’. On arrival at the Mersey Bar anchorage, no grain berth was available and initially she did not proceed further. Time was to count a speci?ed period after Customs clearance but this could not be obtained at the anchorage. An additional clause, however, provided that, if the vessel was unable to berth immediately upon arrival because of congestion, she was to present notice of readiness at the Mersey Bar anchorage in accordance with the principal clause dealing with the commencement of laytime. Notice of readiness at the anchorage having been rejected by the charterers, the owners ordered her to a lay-by berth in the dock where she was to berth when one became available. Here a second notice of readiness was presented and this time accepted. The argument between the parties was as to whether the ?rst notice was valid or just the second. Mocatta J was in no doubt that the ?rst notice was a good notice. The reference to ‘‘berth’’ in the additional clause was to the discharging berth and to require a vessel to go additionally to a lay-by berth just to give notice seemed unreasonable and uncommercial in the context of a berth charter.

  3.200在The Puerto Rocca案,也发生过类似情况,有关结关的时间问题。该案是,根据泊位租船合同要求,Puerto Rocca轮到利物浦港内卸载谷物,有一条款规定:‘不论靠泊与否’时间照计。抵达Mersey默西河口沙洲锚地后,却没有空闲可用的谷物泊位,而且该轮不能再进一步前行。装卸时间可以从结完关的一定时间之后起算,但是在锚地却不能结关。然而,有一条附加条款规定:在船舶抵达后,若由于港口拥挤而不能立即马上靠泊的话,根据装卸时间起算的基本条款,在默西河口沙洲锚地船舶就可以递交准备就绪通知书。但是当时承租人却拒收在锚地递交的准备就绪通知书,船东就指示船舶进入码头港池停靠在等泊泊位上,即当卸货泊位空闲时就可靠泊。在此处,随即又递交了第二份准备就绪通知书。这次准备就绪通知书被接受了。当事双方争议的焦点是,到底是第一份通知书有效,还是第二份有效?Mocatta法官毫不置疑地判定第一份通知书有效。附加条款中所谓的‘泊位’是指卸货泊位,而且仅仅是为了递交通知书却让船舶另外去靠在一个等泊泊位,根据泊位租船合同的本意,好像是不合理的和违反商业性的。

  3.201 An interesting illustration of the relationship between an additional requirement relating to the commencement of laytime and a reachable on arrival clause is provided by London Arbitration 6/84. Here an additional clause provided that ‘‘ . . . At . . . discharging before tendering notice of readiness the vessel to comply with all port formalities including Gas Free Certi?cate . . . ’’. Although not stated in the brief report available, the vessel was presumably a combination carrier and at the time carrying dry cargo. On arrival at the discharge port, there was a three and a half day delay before an Inspector could get out to the vessel at the anchorage because of bad weather (which prevented small boats coming out but would not have prevented the vessel from berthing, had a berth been available). In fact, the ship concerned did not berth until 13 days after arrival, owing to congestion. The charterers argued that laytime could not commence until after the Gas Free Certi?cate was obtained, whereas the owners argued that time should run from six hours after her arrival, there being also a provision to that effect.

  3.201在报道的伦敦仲裁1984年第6号案,对装卸时间起算的额外要求与抵达即靠泊条款之间的关系进行了有趣的说明。在此,附加条款规定:‘……在……卸货,递交准备就绪通知书前,该轮必须办完一切手续,包括要获得除气证书……等’。尽管在简报中没作说明,但可推测该船是一艘多用途货轮,当时正装着干货。抵达卸港后,由于天气恶劣(坏天气可以阻止小船出海,但,如果泊位空闲的话,不能阻止大船靠泊)检验员不能在锚地登轮检查,结果导致了3天半的延迟。实际上,该轮抵达后由于港口拥挤,一直等了 13天才靠泊。承租人辩称说,直到获得除气证书之后装卸时间才能开始起算。然而船东争议道,装卸时间应从抵达之后的6小时起算,而且亦有条款对此作了明确的规定。

  3.202 On those facts, the arbitrators held the charterers to be in breach of the reachable on arrival clause. Had a berth been available on the vessel’s arrival, she would probably have berthed a few hours after arrival and the Gas Free Inspection would have been completed and a certi?cate issued two hours after that. That, then, said the arbitrators, would have been the point in time from which the six hours before laytime commenced would have run and the owners were entitled to claim demurrage based on this notional timescale.

  3.202基于这些事实,仲裁员裁定:承租人违反了抵达即靠泊条款。假如船舶抵达时有可用泊位的话,她就本应可能在抵达几个小时后靠上泊位,而且,除气检查本应该在抵达两个小时后完成并签发除气证书。于是,仲裁员说:从此时间点开始,装卸时间起算前的这6小时就开始转动,所以船东有权根据这一理论上的时刻表来索赔滞期费。

  3.203 Had it not been for the speci?c provision requiring a Gas Free Certi?cate, it is likely that such an inspection of a vessel carrying other than a liquid cargo or whose previous cargo had been other than a liquid cargo (if she arrived in ballast) would have been considered a routine matter or formality, such as not to delay the giving of notice of readiness. The case may be contrasted with one that came before New York arbitrators, The Permeke. The vessel was again an OBO (ore/bulk/oil carrier) but this time carrying a cargo of crude oil.

  3.203如果没有特殊条款规定要求除气证书,这很可能是针对装载非液货船舶的检查,或者她运载的上一票货是另一种液体货(如果船舶是空载到达的话)的检查,就应该是看作为日常事务或例行手续,而不会造成递交准备就绪通知书的延迟。这个案子可以与另一个提交到纽约仲裁的The Permeke案相比较。后者所涉及的船舶也是OBO(即矿砂/散货/油轮),但是,这一次她所运载的是一票原油。

  3.204 The vessel arrived off New York and tendered a notice of readiness. US law prohibited foreign ?ag vessels from off loading oil in US waters unless they held a Tank Vessel Examination Letter (TVEL). This could only be obtained on ?rst arrival in the US following an inspection by the US Coast Guard (USCG), which in this case took some three and a half hours from when the USCG boarded until issue of the letter. No de?ciencies in the vessel were found.

  3.204该轮抵达纽约港外就递交了准备就绪通知书。但是美国法律禁止悬挂外国旗的船舶进入美国水域装油,除非她们已经获得了油轮检査许可证(TVEL)。这一许可证只有在首次抵达美国水域并随后通过了美国海岸警卫队的检查后方能取得。在这—案例中,该轮在检査中没有发现欠缺。美国海岸警卫队登轮后,用了 3个半小时就签发给了这一证书。

  3.205 The charter did not speci?cally refer to the vessel having a TVEL but did have a provision requiring the vessel to have on board all necessary certi?cates and furthermore, at the time of ?xing, the owners warranted the vessel was eligible to trade to the US. In fact no time was lost to the charterers by the failure to have this certi?cate and the owners argued its provision was a mere formality. This was rejected by the tribunal who held that time did not begin to run until six hours after the TVEL was issued. It is likely that the decision would have been the same had this been London Arbitration.

  3.205所涉及的租船合同中并没有特别提到船舶要获得油轮检査许可证,但有一个条款要求船上要具备所有必需的在船证书,另外,在签订合同的当时,船东保证他的船舶适于往美国的贸易。实际上,船上没有这一证书,承租人并未没有时间损失,而船东争辩说这个条款仅仅是一种例行公事。仲裁庭驳回了他的论点并裁定直到取得油轮检查许可证后6小时才可计算装卸时间。如果这在伦敦仲裁的话,很可能也是一样的裁决。

  3.206 In The Amiral Fahri Engin, time charterers sought to claim against head owners because they said the master failed to obtain free pratique from the customs, sanitary and port authorities at Tuapse upon arrival or protest against the failure to grant free pratique or if this was to be given by radio by the port medical of?cer or sanitary authority as was required by the subcharter. A further clause in the subcharter provided that, if free pratique was not granted promptly upon arrival, the master should protest and in the absence of protest, laytime should commence at the earliest ‘‘upon receipt of free pratique’’. The sanitary authority gave free pratique by radio on 1 January 1989 on the vessel’s arrival but she was delayed in berthing until 8 January. It was argued that laytime did not therefore commence until 8 January. This argument was rejected by Saville J, who held that as is customary the only authority to grant free pratique was the medical authority, which they did on the vessel’s arrival.

  3.206在The Amiral Fahri Engin案,期租承租人试图向原船东索赔,因为他们说船长在到达Tuapse港时(俄罗斯黑海港口)未能从海关、卫生和港口当局获得免检证书,并且他也从未就此递交抗议声明,或者,如果是由港口医疗官员或卫生当局通过无线电签发免检证书的话,也未声明是否按照转租合同的要求去做。在转租合同中另外有一条款规定,如果抵港后未能马上获得免检证书,船长就应该做出抗议声明,而且,如无抗议声明,装卸时间就应该从最早‘获得免检证书’时起算。该轮在1989年1月1日抵港时就通过了卫生局的无线电检疫,但她要延迟等到1月8日才靠泊。期租承租人声称装卸时间要到1月8日才开始起算。Saville法官否决了这一争辩,并判定:由于习惯上只是卫生当局进行检疫签发许可证,他们在该轮抵达时就已进行了检疫。

  3.207 Other examples of conditions precedent include a certi?cate of compliance with US Coast Guard regulations relating to the transfer of oil, a requirement that formalities for entering port had been passed by the port authorities and a requirement that the vessel be securely moored at the loading or discharging place.

  3.207其他前提条件的例子还包括有,诸如符合美国海岸警卫队对油船的有关驳油规则的证书,进港手续需经港口当局批准的要求,以及对船舶在装卸位置牢固系泊的要求等。

  3.208 In London Arbitration 14/96, provision of a stowage plan was held not to be an additional requirement. In London Arbitration 19/07, the tribunal held that because the vessel was over 20 years old and thus required special permission from the authorities to enter a Libyan port, a failure to ensure this was given before notice was tendered invalidated that notice. The owners had applied for permission before the vessel’s arrival but permission was not given until after her arrival, although the lack of permission did not result in any delay in berthing, which was due to a combination of congestion and bad weather. The owners’ argument that permission was a mere formality was rejected.

  3.208在报道的伦敦仲裁1996年第14号案,积载图条款被判定不是额外附加的条件要求。在报道的2007年第19号案,仲裁庭裁定,由于船龄超过20年,因此进入利比亚港口需要当局的特别许可证,在递交准备就绪通知书之前不能确保获得此许可证致使通知书无效。船东在船舶抵达前已经申请此许可证,但直到船舶抵达之后也没有签发此许可证,尽管没有它靠泊并未有任何延迟,而延迟是由于压港和恶劣天气共同导致的。船东的争辩这许可证仅是例行手续,但是被否决。
  

  《装卸时间与滞期费》购买链接(点击可购买)

  海运圈聚焦专栏作者 魏长庚船长(微信号CaptWei)


最新海员招聘
木匠 发布时间:2016-07-15 15:58:07
水手 发布时间:2016-07-15 15:56:32
木匠 发布时间:2014-06-04 09:54:37
大厨 发布时间:2014-06-04 09:53:16
白皮三副 发布时间:2014-06-04 09:52:19
最新海员简历
胡力元 发布时间:2019-04-23 11:33:10
倪帆 发布时间:2019-04-22 19:43:10
刘二副 发布时间:2019-04-23 07:31:01
吕杰 发布时间:2019-04-15 11:22:04
黄文斌 发布时间:2019-04-08 16:11:26

相关栏目

相关新闻

最新企业公告

最新海员证办理

最新报名

会员中心 我要求职 我要招聘 职务晋升 办海员证 培训招生 知识更新 广告投放

海员网站长 点击这里与海员招聘网客服联系 652522234 | 合作请来信

版权归┊海员网 海员招聘网 船员招聘网 海员论坛 船东招聘 船务公司招聘 http://www.ycseaman.com网站所有。

海员网常年法律顾问:李晓曦 苏ICP备12072381号-1 海员网还提供船讯网船舶动态查询网站地图