Laytime “is a term used to refer to the time allowed for charters to load / unload cargo as reimbursement for ownership. To compensate the owners for their loss of use of the vessel. Naturally, most parties to the agreement contain conditions that restrict the duration of the rest period and / or the reduction of the law in certain circumstances as agreed between the parties.
Obviously it is important to decide when the set time starts because this is the key to the separation of responsibilities during the time spent on line and / or the termination of the port. Most contract groups require owners to submit a notice of readiness to be loaded or unloaded at the port stating that the ship is fully qualified for cargo operations. While owners are also required to provide a variety of limited and clear notifications of the expected arrival or unloading of a port to enable drivers to perform all the necessary arrangements on time, notice of readiness to build is a contractual step required to commence. As a result, contract parties often have a provision which means a) when the readiness notice can be given by contract and b) when the working period begins and when the readiness notice is officially issued (usually the time set after the readiness notification tender, although the initial set time may be suspended when the port is inactive).
Requirements for a valid notice of readiness to be served:
- The vessel is an arrived vessel
- The vessel is ready to receive or discharge the cargo
- The notice of readiness is tendered to and received by the proper person according to the charterparty
- The notice of readiness is tendered in a contractual way
- The notice of readiness is tendered at a time that is allowed by the charterparty.
A notice of readiness cannot be officially sent before the ship qualifies as a “arrival ship”. In order to be a “arrival ship”, the vessel must arrive at a port where a notice of readiness can be sent. This area is specified, either explicitly or implicitly, by charter party. Under the charterparty port, the ship must arrive at a point where ships usually wait inside the harbor unless, in a sense, it can proceed directly to the loading / unloading area where notice of readiness to depart as soon as it enters the harbor. Under the charter party, the ship must arrive at the proposed loading / unloading area. These basic suggestions may vary by the inclusion of certain provisions such as “whether you are in the berth or not” (“WIBON”) or “whether you are in the port or not” (“WIPON”), although the meaning of this final clause has not yet been determined by the courts.
The result of the provision of “WIBON” in the tender notice of readiness under local charter party was considered by the House of Lords in “Kyzikos”. The Kyzikos were assigned to carry cargo of steel and / or steel products from Italy to Houston. The constitution was in the Gencon form and was provided, inter alia, as follows: “Exit port or area – 1/2 safe constant flow, accommodation available at each port…. Missed time waiting for calculation area calculated as normal Wipon / Wibon / Wifpon / Wccon. “The ship came to Houston to take off. At the sale of the readiness notice, and for every visible moment after that, the bench was available. However, the ship was unable to continue its voyage for three days because the fog had closed its pilot station. The owners argued that, due to the “WIBON” arrangement at charter party, a valid readiness notice could be sent as soon as the ship arrives at the customary port of Houston and that the provision of “WIBON” has successfully converted charter party into a charter party harbor. The couple argued that, for the most part, the phrase has the effect of allowing for a valid notice of readiness to be placed in a customary waiting area if the appointment was not available due to traffic congestion not when it was available but not available for some other reason.
The House of Lords has conducted a thorough review of the relevant authorities and noted that the dispute over the provision of “WIBON” has transformed the lease of the port into a local charterparty based on the following passage from Roskill LJ’s judgment on “Joanna Oldendorf” :
The phrase “whether you are in the bedroom or not” was intended to transform a residential area into a port rental and to ensure that under a settlement agreement it can be removed as soon as the ship arrives at the commercial port of the port concerned so that the specified time commences expires.”.
The House of Lords notes that this view is only used if there is no available space for the ship on its arrival at the port and not if there is a warehouse but the ship is barred from proceeding in bad weather. The long line of authority in the use of the term “WIBON” in rental areas only deals with the problem of overcrowding in ports, not in bad weather which prevents the ship from proceeding to an uninhabited area.
For this reason, The House of Lords has held that this statement has long been regarded as short of either whether it is institutional (available space) or non-local (non-existent). As indicated above, the provision of “WIPON” appears to have not been tested in the courts. It seems reasonable to assume, however, that this would be interpreted in the same way to allow a notice of readiness to be released as soon as the ship arrives at the port of port if it is congested within the port even if this is outside the harbor limits.
READINESS IN ALL RESPECTS
Even if the vessel has landed at the port required by the charterparty, notice of readiness will not be given unless it is physically and legally ready by all means to load or move the cargo. It is possible to speed up the tender for a valid notice of eligibility for inclusion in the provision of “whether or not the custom has been abolished” (“WCCON”) or “whether in free practice or not” (“WIFPON”).
Pre-shipping notice tender is a ship that has arrived and / or is ready by all means.
In “Mexico I” , the English Court of Appeals reaffirmed the suggestion that a notice of readiness, which is invalid when given because a ship is not an incoming ship and / or ready to load or unload, does not apply automatically when these requirements are met later.
“Mexico I” was hired to carry part of the 5,000 tons of maize bag to Angola with the owners having the right to complete it with other baggage. Maize goods filled up part of the owners’ belongings and 500 tons of alubia beans that they had agreed to carry to the beekeepers under a separate contract. The ship arrived at the port on January 20 and was notified the next day by telephone, although the shipment of corn was not completely released from the excess baggage for up to 1025 hours on February 6th. The export of maize material did not start until 1435 hours on 19 February. The owners acknowledged that the notice of readiness was incorrect when the tender was awarded, but said that we had already set a time when the ship was ready to unload 1025 hours of corn on February 6th. The Court of Appeal disagreed, saying that the king should have given a new notice, which was valid at the time to start work, and that an incorrect notice of readiness would not serve as a delayed action device to start the set time.
The owners also argued that the couple would have to accept that an incorrect notification of readiness resulted in a period of operation as soon as the vessel was ready to be discharged, because they had received an incorrect notice. The debate was based on the following proposals:
- a) shareholders had openly or implied their right to enforce strict contractual terms (waivers); or
- b) the couple could not rely on strict contract terms because these terms have varied according to the parties’ agreement, as evidenced by the course of the partnership (variance of the agreement); or
- c) the couple is barred from enforcing strict contractual terms because both parties act in reliance on shared shared assumptions that their legal relationship is operating differently (estoppel per meeting).
The Court found that the couple had initially received a false notification of readiness only because they relied on the king’s assurance that the ship was ready to unload the corn. The Court also found that the payers had not explicitly or implicitly accepted that the deposition period began when the ship was ready to unload the corn load. Therefore, no proprietary reasons established. However, the Court should not have decided when the appointment period would start because employers agreed that it should begin as soon as it was issued. If the couple had not made this consent, the Court could have ruled that, without the new notice of readiness to be granted to the owners, the filing period had not commenced. The decision in “The Mexico I” was used by the English Chamber of Commerce in “Agamemnon” 4. “Agamemnon” was hired on the Gencon form for a trip from one beautiful and safe place in Baton Rouge to one beautiful and safe place in Brisbane. The relevant terms of the charterparty are as follows:
“The time lost in waiting for the calculation area is calculated as loading or subtraction time.…” (Section 8); “If the loading / unloading area is not available when the ship arrives at or outside the loading or unloading port or near where it is permitted to approach, the ship will have the right to give notice of readiness to arrive at the result of the time period. (clause 32) no
“Time to calculate whether you have a headache or not, whether the notification has been received or not.…” (Article 33). The gentleman gave notice of readiness to the South West Pass, which was a common waiting area for ships wishing to enter the Mississippi River to proceed to one of the river-level ports. Baton Rouge has its own anchorage but 170 km from South West Pass. The Court of Appeals held that the notice of readiness to be released before the ship arrived at Baton Rouge port was not a valid notice and that the arrival of the ship at Bon Rouge anchorage would not guarantee us. Non-contract readiness tender for non-contract when the ship is an incoming and ready ship by all means.
As indicated above, travel contracts usually provide that notice of readiness should be given within working hours or at a specified time. It is also common for chiefs to receive a tender notice of readiness to arrive even if this means that a notice of readiness is issued without the time specified in the governing constitution. In “Petr Schmidt” 5 the Court of Appeal of England had the opportunity to consider the validity of the notice of readiness to be discharged outside the constitutional period at a time when the ship was ready by all means and at a place provided by the charterparty. “Petr Schmidt” was rented in a modified apartment of the Asbatankvoy form charterparty. Clause 30 provides that “notice of readiness to load and unload the port must be given within 06.00 and 17.00 local time”. Section 6 of the constitution provided, inter alia, that “the prescribed period…. Will begin to expire six (6) days after receipt.
Owners may wish to include the “you can reach your destination” or “always accessible” clause in the charterparty, which exceeds the WIBON / WIPON clause, and in addition to section 18 (b) of Norgrain 1989. authorize that the Ship will be able to proceed directly to the destination. “Regular accessibility” requires that they ensure that the vessel will be able to continue directly to the port and leave the area where the cargo operation is completed. If the vessel is unable to do so (for any reason, including, as a result of WIBON / WIPON, congestion, but also, for example, adverse weather conditions), owners may be entitled to compensation for shipping costs, and / or if the ship arrives, the storage period will apply again. inflation can begin to increase