关于NOR及LAYTIME的若干问题

reachable on arrival

保护下，如果船东无法抵达 指定位置，那么可以

索赔损失，但在该案中，船舶可以抵达指定位置，因此船东应该递交 有效的

NOR

开始

laytime < /p>

计算，但船长在抵达

D

锚地后并未重新递 交有效的

NOR

。

At that time the vessel had noted

charterers had submitted (relying on The Johanna Oldendorff [1973] 2

Lloyd's Rep 285 and The Agamemnon [1998] 1 Lloyd's Rep 675) that the

carrying voyage did not come to an end until the vessel had finished her

voyage

and

reached

a

point

as

close

as

possible

to

where

cargo

operations

were to be carried out as possible.

In the tribunal's experience, the phrase end or commencement of sea

passage as used in a vessel's records meant the point in time when the

vessel

changed

her

manning

state

to

or

from

sea

watches

to

one

for

entering

or

leaving

harbour.

The

phrase

away

was

sometimes

used

to

indicate

when

the

sea

passage

had

commenced.

In

other

words

it

was

more

to

do

with

who

was

on

the

bridge

and

who

was

in

the

engine

room

than

whether

the

vessel

had reached a particular geographical point. There was nothing in the

present case to suggest that the transition from sea watches was linked

to arrival at any particular geographical point.

The owners argued that if they were not entitled to demurrage, they were

entitled to claim damages for detention in a similar sum for a failure

by

the

charterers

to

procure

a

berth

upon

arrival

as

required

by clause 9.

Held,

that

since

the

mother

vessel

was

not

at

Fujairah

when

the

chartered

vessel arrived, there was clearly a breach by the charterers of their

obligation under clause 9. The relationship between the

arrival

provision

in

clause

9

and

the

commencement

of

laytime

provisions

in clause 6 had of course been settled law since The Laura Prima [1982]

1 Lloyd's Rep 1.

What

the

law,

as

it

now

stood,

said

was

that

if

the

ship

in

question

could

not give a valid NOR because she could not proceed to her specified

destination,

her

owners

could

claim

damages.

However,

if

she

had

arrived

at a place from which NOR could be given, the owners' remedy was to give

notice

and

use

their laytime.

In

those

circumstances,

the

owners

did

not

have the option of claiming damages instead, but had to give notice.

In the present case, the owners could have given NOR on arrival at

anchorage D at Fujairah, and it was not therefore open to them to claim

damages.

Asbatankvoy

合同第六条 关于

NOR

规定的如下，含有

arri val

字眼。

NOTICE

OF

READINESS. Upon

arrival

at

customary

anchorage

at

each

port

of

loading or discharge, the Master or his agent shall give the Charterer

or his agent notice by letter,telegraph, wireless or telephone that the

Vessel

is

ready

to

load

or

discharge

cargo,

berth

or

no

berth,

and

laytime,

as hereinafter provided, shall commence upon the expiration of six (6)

hours

after

receipt

of

such

notice,

or

upon

the

Vessel's

arrival

in

berth

(i.e.,

finished

mooring

when

at

a

sealoading

or

discharging

terminal

and

all fast when loading or discharging alongside a wharf),whichever first

occurs.

However,

where

delay

is

caused

to

Vessel

getting

into

berth

after

giving notice or readiness for any reason over which Charterer has no

control, such delay shall not count as used laytime.

7

、[2009] EWHC 3046 (Comm) The “Merida”

在该案中，租家安排

轮到天津新港装钢板，意向到

Cad iz

及

Bilbao

卸；船于

2007

年

3

月

10

日

0400

抵达 新港并递交

NOR

。船舶随后在等泊，于

3

月

30

日

1700

上引水，

1715

起锚靠泊， 于

1950

最终靠好（

all fas t

）；

2125

开始装货，

日

0600

完货。< /p>

船东认为是港口租约，在抵达的时候可以递交

NOR

；租家抗辩说是泊位租约，只

有船事实上靠好泊 位才可以递交有效的

NOR

。

租约约定如下：

One

good

and

safe

charterers'

berth

terminal

4

stevedores

Xingang

to

one

good and safe berth Cadiz and one good and safe berth Bilbao

[Interposing

here,

I

shall

refer

to

this

term,

neutrally,

as

the

term.

DETAILS TO THE C/P

CLAUSE 2

[1] The vessel to load at one good and safe port/one good and safe

charterers'

berths

Xingang

and

to

discharge

at

one

good

and

safe

port/one

good and safe charterers' berth Cadiz and at one good and safe port/one

good and safe charterers' berth Bilbao.

CLAUSE 4

At

port

of

load

and

at

port

discharge

notice

of

readiness

to

be

given

and

accepted in writing and only during the period from 08.00 hours to 17.00

hours Mondays to Sundays…..

法官认为租约中已经非常清楚地列明了泊位名称，

该租约属于泊位租约；

因此船

舶必须抵达指定泊位，成为到达船

arrived ship

之后才可以递交有效的

NOR

。

But, if I am wrong about that, then, with great respect, it seems to me

that

the

arbitrators have

fallen

into

further

error.

It

will

be

recalled

that in para. 25 of the award, the arbitrators said that had this been

a berth charterparty, there would have been no need for a provision such

as cl.2[2]. I regret that I cannot agree. Were this a port charterparty,

cl.

2[2]

may

have

been

unnecessary

insofar

as

it

deals

with

time

counting,

in that (provided the anchorage was within the port limits) the vessel

would

likely

have

been

an

arrived

ship

throughout.

But

if

the

charterparty

is

a

berth

charterparty,

then

the

provision

in

cl.2[2]

as

to

time

counting

does indeed have a real meaning

–

absent some such or other express

provision, no time would have counted prior to the vessel actually

berthing.

For all these reasons, therefore, I am amply satisfied that the

charterparty was a berth not a port charterparty. The appeal must

therefore be allowed with the consequence, as I understand it, that

Owners' claim for demurrage must fail.

类似的，

如合同无相反规定，

则

one

safe

berth,

London

属于泊位租约；

London,

one safe berth

属于港口租约。

参《

Shipping Law

》

-Chapter 11-Port charters

Under a port charter, the approach and carrying voyages will terminate

when the vessel reaches the port. If the vessel can proceed directly to

berth, NOR cannot be given until reaching the berth. See The Johanna

Oldendorff[1974] Ac 479 at 557.

If the vessel cannot proceed to the berth on reaching the port, NOR may

now be given and the vessel will become an “ arrived” vessel.

很多时候，

碰到直接靠泊的情况，

船长在抵达锚 地或者抵达引航站

（泊位空着未

抛锚）都直接递交

NOR

。碰到较真的租家，此情况下递交的

NOR< /p>

是无效的。在港

口租约下，如果能直接靠泊，得等靠泊后（

make all fast

）才可以递交

NOR

。

其实碰到可以直接靠泊的 ，

在锚地或引航站递交

NOR

和到泊位 靠好以后递交

NOR

，

laytime

在时间上都一样的，因为正常情况下都会规定移泊时间需扣除不

算。但前一种情况，会导致

NOR

无效而无法触发

laytime

计算。

关于此移泊时间，在

London Arbitration 8/14 ( 2014) 896 LMLN2

案中，

涉及到 泊位之间的移泊，租家认为泊位之间的移泊时间应该扣除不算

laytime

但法官认为租约中没有列明不算，应该继续算。

The

charterers’

third

point

was

that

time

spent

shifting

between

berths

during the loading operation should not count as laytime because the

charter

was

silent

as

to

the

question

of

how

shifting

time

should

be

dealt

with.

That

argument

turned

the

true

legal

position

on

its

head:

that

very

silence

in

fact

meant

that

the

time

had

to

count

against

charterers

since

there

was

no

exception

to

its

counting.

Accordingly

the

owners

were

right

on that point too, and their loading port demurrage entitlement was

US$$20,332.81 net.

在该案中还涉及到留置货物期间是否继续计算

laytime

。

法官认为船东依据租约

有权合法地留置货物，因此在留置货 物期间，正常计算

laytime

。

Accordingly,

the

tribunal

had

no

hesitation

in

concluding

that

the

owners

were entitled to exercise their lien in the way they did and that they

were

either

contractually

entitled

to

have

demurrage

count

from

the

time

NOR was given on 9 September until the completion of discharging, or

–

to

the

extent

that

time

was

lost

as

a

result

of

their

exercise

of

the

lien

–

entitled to have the lien period counted as damages for detention (at

the demurrage rate), after which demurrage continued to accrue in the

usual way. This meant that the owners’ claim for demurrage/damages for

detention at the discharging port succeeded.

船东如果在卸货前行使留置权，

并不影响

NOR

的有效性。

可参

《

Voyage

Charter

》

-Chapter 15-Laytime

，

15.46 The fact that the Owners is lawfully unwilling to discharge, for

example, because he intends to exercise a lien on the cargo, does not

prevent

the

tender

of

a

valid

notice

of

readiness.

See

Rashtriya

Chemicals

and Fertilizers v Huddart Parker Industries ( The Boral Gas) [1988] 1

Lloyd’s

Rep.342;

Gill

&

Duffus

S.A.

v

Rionda

Futures

Ltd

[1994]

2

Lloyd’s

Rep.67

对于移泊，参《

Voyage Charter

》

Chapter 57

及

Chapter 59:

57.22 Not all delays in shifting are necessarily covered by the exception, which covers only shifting from the

anchorage to the berth. It does not cover shifting between berths,

26

although there may be occasions when the

effective shift between berths is via an anchorage, nor shiftings to and from an anchorage after the vessel has first

berthed.

27

Indeed, such a shift may also entail the vessel taking on additional ballast for stability purposes. It is

submitted that the exception ought in principle to be limited to the first arrival shifting and deballasting, and not to

any subsequent activities.

及

9.

Time consumed on account of shifting shall count as used laytime except as otherwise provided in Clause 15.