平码天下|新聞|財經|船舶|海事|港口|船員|大圖|人物|企業|指數|專題|潮汐
注冊 找回密碼

116期的平码资料:《裝卸時間與滯期費》第3章-裝卸時間的起算-62

平码天下 www.gvspo.icu CHAPTER 3 第3章

Commencement of laytime

裝卸時間的起算

Whether in port or not (WIPON) 無論進港與否

3.411 This phrase is frequently used in conjunction with the words ‘‘whether in berth or not’’ and the criteria for its use are broadly the same, of course, substituting port for berth.

3.411這個短語經常是同‘不論靠泊與否’結合使用的,而其判斷標準也基本相同,其中只不過是用港口這一詞語取代了泊位而已。

3.412 A slightly unusual set of circumstances arose for consideration before London arbitrators arising out of delays caused by the convoy system in force at the time for vessels carrying cargo to Iranian ports. Under the particular charter, the vessel concerned was ordered to Bandar Bushire. To get there, she had to join a convoy at Bandar Abbas, where she arrived in September 1981. The master cabled notice of readiness and eventually the vessel joined a convoy in late November, arriving at her destination in early December. She berthed a few days later and completed discharge towards the end of December.

3.412曾經有一種稍微異常的背景情況被提交到倫敦仲裁裁決,那是關于兩伊戰爭時期前往伊朗港口運貨的船舶被強制護航而導致的延遲。根據那份特定的租船合同,船舶被指示前往Bandar Bushire港。為了到那里,該輪必須在Bandar Abbas加入護航編隊。她于1981年9月到達Abbas錨地。船長通過無線電報遞交了準備就緒通知書。最后于11月底加入護航編隊并于12月初抵達目的地。在等了幾天之后該輪靠泊卸貨,直到12月底才卸完貨。

3.413 The owners argued that their ship was an Arrived ship for Bandar Bushire, when she arrived at Bandar Abbas, although that was some 400 miles away. The owners submitted that, although their vessel was not then at the nominated discharge port, she was ready to discharge and fully at the disposal of the charterers. Thus, two out of three tests derived from The Johanna Oldendorff were satis?ed. The third test, namely physical arrival, was, argued the owners, displaced by clause 22 of the charter, which stipulated that a notice of readiness could be tendered ‘‘whether in port or not’’. The owners argued that the WIPON stipulation operated in the very special circumstances extant at Iranian ports at that time to make valid cabled notices given by the master in September.

3.413 船東爭辯稱:他們的船舶到達了Bandar Abbas港就應該被視為是Bandar Bushire港的抵達船,盡管兩者相距大約400多海里。船東認為,盡管他們船舶并不位于指定的卸貨港,但該輪已經做好了卸貨準備,并已完全處于承租人的支配之下了。因此,按照The Johanna Oldendorff案中的三個衡量標準,她已經滿足了其中二個條件,該標準的第三項,即實際抵達,船東爭辯說,它已被該租船合同的第22條款所替代,因為該條規定是‘不論進港與否’均可遞交準備就緒通知書。船東還認為,針對伊朗港口當時比較特殊的背景,WIPON的規定起著非常重要的作用,是使船長在9月份用電報遞交的準備就緒通知書是有效的。

3.414 The arbitrators, however, rejected these arguments, holding that the wait at Bandar Abbas could be regarded as an interruption to the voyage on which the vessel was engaged, a voyage which was only completed when the vessel arrived at the roads off Bandar Bushire. A place which was almost 400 miles distant from the port of destination could not possibly be held to be within the ambit of WIPON. If it were to be the only place at which a valid notice could be given, that could only be achieved by very clear and special wording in the charter. The convoy system was as much a hazard of the voyage falling to the owners’ account as any other navigational impediment that might arise. Furthermore, Bandar Abbas could not be considered the ‘‘usual waiting place’’ for Bandar Bushire.

3.414盡管如此,仲裁員還是駁回了上述這些觀點,判定:船舶在Bandar Abbas港的等候期間只能被視為船舶進行的航程中的一次中斷,只有她抵達了Bandar Bushire港外錨地,才能視為該航程的結束。一個距目的港幾乎400多海里的地方不可能被認定為屬于WIP0N的范疇。假如它是唯一的一個可以遞交有效通知書的地方,那么就必須在租船合同中加以非常清楚和特定的詞語進行說明。這種護航制度同其他可能產生的航行障礙一樣,是一種航行危險,應由船東承擔。另外,Bandar Abbas港也不能被視為是Bandar Bushire港的‘通常等候區域’。

CNSS官方帳號

我要評論(0

更多專家

魏長庚
魏船長自2000年開始,有16年海上船舶航運經驗,先后在7條遠洋貨輪擔任船長,憑借豐富的航運實踐經驗,魏船長非常熟悉船舶的運營操作,在船舶操縱、貨物裝載與管理等方面有著豐富的實踐經驗。 近年來致力海商法的翻譯工作,包括“勞氏法律文庫”推薦,Informa出版的Bills of Lading(提單)、Time Charter(期租合同)、Marine Letter of Indemnify(海運保函)等書籍,和他人合作翻譯《船舶建造》。 專業著作:中英文版《船舶買賣》第六版、《裝卸時間與滯期費》

更多他的文章

更多《深潛WEEKLY》

  • 【深潛】拒絕下船 中國游客再成“網紅”
  • 【深潛】從馬士基看集裝箱運輸發展趨勢
  • 【深潛】樸槿惠下臺 三星集團何去何從
  • 【深潛】2016-2017海盜形勢改善
  • 【深潛】中日韓船企“三國殺”
   

更多專家專欄

最新評論

山东时时是什么意思是什么意思是什么 幸运飞艇两面盘走势图 重庆时时彩是否是骗局 福彩3d位选投注金额表 星罗斗地主龙虎 彩哥哥计划软件网址 新时时彩官网app下载 11选5任8稳赚投注技巧 北京pk10软件 全天幸运飞艇开奖计划 重庆时时彩内部公式 内部平特一肖 球探比分网足球即时比 导师带快3是不是圈套 江西时时专家预测 如何购买大小单双最合理