《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

READINESS TO LOAD AND DISCHARGE 装/卸准备就绪

3.117 London Arbitration 19/10 was similar to The Maratha Envoy (see para. 3.107 above) in that it concerned whether notice tendered at the pilot station was valid in respect of two upriver ports and in it the tribunal concluded that notice tended at Morong Pilot Station was not valid in respect of a call to Lubuk Gaung.

3.117在报道的伦敦仲裁2010年第19号案是类似于The Maratha Envoy案(见上文第3.107段),该案涉及的是,就2个上游港口来讲,在引航站递交的准备就绪通知书是否有效,在仲裁庭判定是,对于挂靠印尼Lubuk Gaung港口而言,在Morong(在印尼苏门答腊/Sumtera旁的Pulau Rupat小岛上Selat Morong河口)引航站递交的通知书是无效的。

3.118 When the vessel has arrived at the specified destination, whether in order to load or to discharge, she must then meet the second requirement necessary for the commencement of laytime. She must, so far as she is concerned, be in all respects ready for loading or discharge.

3.118当船舶已经抵达了指定的目的地,不论是为了装货还是卸货,为了起算装卸时间的需要,她都必须满足第二个必要条件。就该轮而言,她必须在各方面做好装货或卸货的准备工作。

3.119 Whilst the vessel must be ready in all respects, nevertheless, in Gill & Duffus SA v. Rionda Futures Ltd, Clarke J held that the shipowners’ exercise of a lien, in that case for general average, provided it was both lawful and reasonable, did not prevent the vessel’s being ready and a valid notice of readiness (NOR) could be tendered. In the case of loading, this means that she must be ready in all her holds, so as to give the charterers complete control of every part of the ship in which cargo is to be loaded and must also be properly equipped and ready for the reception of cargo. Similarly, the ship must have obtained all papers and permits necessary for loading.

3.119尽管船舶必须要做好各方面的准备工作,不过,在Gill & Dufus SA v. Rionda Futures Ltd案,Clarke法官判定,船东行使留置权,在本案是为了共同海损,只要它是合法和合理的,就不会妨碍船舶做好准备工作和递交有效的准备就绪通知书。如果是要装货的话,这就意味着她必须准备好所有的货舱,以便承租人能够充分利用该轮的每一个能够装货的部分,而且,她还必须配备适宜的设备以便能够收受货物。同样地,该轮还必须办理好装货所需的一切文件和手续。

3.120 In London Arbitration 4/05, one of the issues raised was whether notice of readiness can be tendered by a vessel under arrest as the result of action taken by the previous charterers of the vessel. The terms of the arrest did not prevent the vessel shifting within the port or conducting cargo operations. At the time notice was tendered, her loading berth was not expected to, and did not, become available for six days, by which time the arrest had been lifted. On the basis that the arrest was a problem that was likely at the time of the arrest to be speedily resolved enabling the vessel to sail upon completion of loading, the tribunal held that the notice tendered whilst the vessel was under arrest was valid.

3.120在报道的伦敦仲裁2005年第4号案中提出的一个争议是,因上一个承租人采取法律行动导致扣押船舶,在船舶扣押期间,是否可以递交准备就绪通知书?按照扣押条件,这并没有妨碍船舶在港内移泊或进行货物作业。在通知书递交当时,她的装货泊位预计还未空出,也确实在6天后泊位才空出可用,当时扣押已经取消。船舶扣押这一问题,当时很可能为了能够使船舶在完货后开航,已是被迅速解决,根据事实基础,仲裁庭裁定在船舶扣押期间递交的通知书是有效的。

3.121 It is not, however, necessary that the ship should be in all respects ready to sail before notice of readiness to load can be given. It will suffice if she is in a condition in which the cargo can be safely received and expects to be ready to sail on completion of loading. For example, some repairs to the engines may be needed and, provided these would not interrupt loading and are expected to be completed during loading, then the ship may still be in a state of readiness to load.

3.121然而,船舶没有必要在递交装货准备就绪通知书之前在各方面做好开航的准备。如果该轮的状态可使货物被安全地接收,并且预期在装货结束时做好开航准备,那么这就足够了。例如,机舱需要进行一些修理,如果这些工作不妨碍装货作业并且预计可以在装货期间完成,那么,船舶仍然算作处于装货准备就绪状态。

3.122 At the port of discharge, the vessel must be ready to discharge before laytime can commence. As Diplock J said in The Massalia (No 2):

It seems to me common sense that the same principle as regards availability of holds would apply to discharging as to loading...

The same principles on legal readiness apply equally, to discharging as they do to loading.

3.122在卸货港,船舶必须在装卸时间起算前做好卸货准备。正如Diplock法官在The Massalia—案中所说的那样:

在我看来,这是基本常识,在装货港对货舱可利用性的这一原则同样也应适用于卸货港……

如同装货港一样,在法律上准备就绪这一原则也同样适用于卸货港。

3.123 It is usual to consider the physical and legal aspects of readiness separately and this approach will also be followed here.

3.123在通常情况下,对船舶准备就绪的实质方面和法律方面是分别予以考虑的,下面就将介绍这一方法。

Physical readiness 实质上准备就绪

3.124 In Groves, Maclean & Co v. Volkart Brothers, Lopes J said:

A ship to be ready to load must be completely ready in all her holds... so as to afford the merchant/ charterer complete control of every portion of the ship available for cargo.

3.124在Groves,Maclean & Co v. Volkart Brothers案中,Lopes法官说:

准备装货的船舶,必须使所有的货舱都全部做好准备……以使货主/承租人能够充分利用该轮的每一处适合装货的部分。

3.125 In a similar vein, in Weir v. Union SS Co Ltd, Lord Davey commented:

. . . you must read such expressions as ‘‘with clear holds’’ or ‘‘the whole reach or burthen of the vessel’’ as meaning the full space of the vessel proper to be filled with cargo...

3.125同样的道理,在 Weir v. Union SS Co Ltd案中,Davey勋爵评述道:

诸如‘清洁的货舱(复数)’或者‘该轮可利用的全部空间或装载量’这些语句都必须解释为船舶所有适合于装货的空间这一含义……

3.126 Which parts of the ship can be considered to be those which should be available for cargo was one of the issues raised in Noemijulia Steamship Co Ltd v. Minister of Food.

3.126究竟船舶的哪些部分被认为适合于装货的空间呢?这就是Noemijulia Steamship Co Ltd v. Minister of Food案提出的争议之一。

3.127 On arrival at Buenos Aires to load a cargo of grain, the charterers found that No 3 hold (both ’tween deck and lower holds) contained bunker coal. The charter, which was on the Centrocon form, provided, inter alia, for the charterers ‘‘to have the full reach and burthen of the steamer including ’tween and shelter decks, bridges, poop, etc. (provided same are not occupied by bunker coals and/or stores)’’. The charterers rejected the notice of readiness tendered by the vessel on four different grounds and purported to cancel the charter. One of their arguments was that they were entitled to do so because of the presence of bunker coal in No 3 lower hold, the proviso they said applying only to No 3 ’tween deck. This argument was rejected by the Court of Appeal, who pointed out that both No 3 ’tween deck and lower hold were designated as reserve bunker spaces. Furthermore, both spaces would reasonably have been needed for bunkers for the voyage. The presence of coal did not therefore mean that the ‘‘full reach and burthen’’ of the steamer had not been made available to the charterers.

3.127该轮抵达布宜诺斯艾利斯准备装谷物时,承租人发现第3舱(包括有双层甲板和底舱)留有燃煤。该租船合同釆用的是标准谷物租船合同的格式范本,其中规定:承租人‘可以使用该轮的一切空间和载货量,包括双层甲板和遮蔽甲板、船桥甲板、船尾甲板等等(如果这些地方没有用作贮藏室或燃料室)’。承租人基于4点不同的理由拒收递交的准备就绪通知书,并要求取消合同。其中一个争议是他们有权如此,因为第3舱的底舱已被燃煤所占据,条件是他们只能利用第3舱的二层甲板。他的这一争论被上诉法院驳回。上诉法院指出:第3舱的二层甲板和底舱均是设计用来储备燃料的。而且,这些空间也是航程所必需的合理储备燃料的地方。所以,存有燃煤并不意味着承租人未能利用该轮的‘全部空间和装载量’。

3.128 One exception that certainly used to exist to the rule that all inward cargo must have been discharged before a ship could be considered ready to load outward cargo arose because sailing ships empty of both cargo and ballast were relatively unstable. Thus, it was normal for sailing ships, as they discharged, to take on board sufficient new cargo or ballast to keep the vessel upright and stable on completion of discharge. This new cargo or ballast could only be stowed in the holds since there was nowhere else. In Sailing Ship Lyderhorn Co v. Duncan, Fox & Co, Cozens Hardy MR said:

I think that the authorities really decide that a vessel is not ready to load unless she is discharged and ready in all her holds so as to give the charterers complete control of every portion of the ship available for cargo, except so much as is reasonably required to keep her upright.

3.128当然,对于船舶能够被认为准备好装载出口货以前必须全部卸空进口货这一原则还有一个例外,因为货物和压载水都卸空的航行船舶相对来说是稳性不足的。因此,通常情况下,对于航行的船舶,在卸完货后,为了保持正浮状态和必要的稳性,要么装上些新货,要么打入压载水。当然,这些新货或压载水只能装在货舱里,因为没有别的地方可装(早期的船舶,压载水舱和货舱互用)。正像上诉法院院长Cozens Hardy大法官在 Sailing Ship Lyderhorn Co v. Duncan,Fox & Co案中所说的那样:

我认为,有关先例事实上已经判定:该轮还是没有做好装货准备,除非是她卸空和准备好所有货舱,以至于使承租人充分利用船舶适合装货的每一部分空间,除此之外还要合理要求该轮保持正浮状态。

参与评论

分享到微信朋友圈

x

打开微信,点击底部的“发现”,

使用“扫一扫”即可将网页分享至朋友圈。