标题: Dispute on demurrage [打印本页] 作者: double 时间: 2013-7-15 15:48 标题: Dispute on demurrage
Dear Mr. Yang:
Good day! So grateful to have a chance to communicate with you on some disputes.
Your analysis and advice will be highly appreciated.
As the role of ship owner, in one voyage to carry coal from Samarinda, Indonesia to China, we have laytime commence disputes due to the tender of NOR before the laycan, calculation of laytime. Please kindly find the relevant CP clauses as following:
QUOTE FROM CP----------------------
7. LAYCAN: 1/10 June 2013
12. NOR TO BE TENDERED DURING OFFICE HOURS MONDAY TO FRIDAY 0900 hours to 1700 hours and Saturday 0900 hours to 1200 hours ,AFTER THE VESSEL HAS ARRIVED AT LOADING PORT UPON VESSEL'S ARRIVAL, WIPON, WIBON AND PROVIDED THE VESSEL IS IN ALL RESPECTS READY TO LOAD BUT EXCLUDING INDONESIA`S 7 MAJOR HOLIDAYS
NOR TO BE TENDRED AT ANY TIME DAY AND NIGHT UPON VESSEL'S ARRIVAL, WIPON, WIBON, WICCON, WIFPON AT DISCHAGRING PORT.
AT LOAD PORT AND DISCHARGE PORT ALLOW TURN TIME 12 HOURS AFTER NOR IS TENDERED, BUT ACTUAL TIME TO COUNT IF COMMENCE EARLIER.
NOR TO BE TENDER PRIOR TO VESSEL’S INSPECTION, BUT IF VESSEL IS FOUND NOT TO BE SUITABLE TO LOAD AND IN ALL RESPECTS READY TO LOAD THE CARGO, THEN LAYTIME SHALL BE SUSPENDED FROM FAIL TO SUCH TIME THE VESSEL CAN BE REINSPECTED AND PASSED AS SUITABLE IN ALL RESPECTS.
BELOW TIME LOST SHOULD BE ON OWNER`S ACCOUNT AND NOT COUNT AS LAYTIME OR DEMURRAGE EVEN ON DEMURRAGE.
At load/discharge port, draft survey time prior to and during the loading /discharging
Any time lost due to bad weather, rain, wind or others.
Any time lost causes attributable to Vessel, Owners Discharge of ballast to the extent that this is not concurrent with loading and which causes delays or interruptions at the Loading Port Shifting time
Breakdown or failure of the Vessel to comply with the requirements or regulations of the Loading Port causing delay or restriction to loading operations
Joint inspection time
Time lost due to Force majure
19. ARBITRATION IN HONGKONG.ENGLISH LAW TO APPLY.
UNQUOTE-----------------------------------------
The disputes focus on these four items as below:
1. As per L/P, laycan starts from 1st June, our vsl arrived and tendered NOR at 1250lt on 30th may(It’s Thursday)，almost 1 day ahead of laycan. Chrts insists that Laycan start from 1st June, therefore the valid NOR time on 0900lt 1st June and laytime comment from 2100lt 1st June per c/p. Whether NOR tender on 30th may is valid，and 12 hour turn time should begin once NOR be tender？whether laytime commence at 0001lt 1st June？
As owner, our point is laytime shall commence at 0001lt 1st June, and the legal precedent LMLN NO.103(1983) supports our point.However we couldn't find the whole precedent, please kindly forward it to us. Many thanks.
2. after completing loading，there is dispute abt final draft survey，we insist tt 5 hours of final draft survey should be count into laytime，chrts insists tt laytime to stop at complete of loading. Our point based on the clause "BELOW TIME LOST SHOULD BE ON OWNER`S ACCOUNT AND NOT COUNT AS LAYTIME OR DEMURRAGE EVEN ON DEMURRAGE. At load/discharge port, draft survey time prior to and during the loading /discharging." As per SOF of LP SAMARINDA, the final draft survey is not prior to or during loading, but after completion of loading. What about your view? Do you have any supporting laws or legal precedent?
3. At 1st discharge port ，in ows standpoint, NOR tender(0745 lt June 14th 2013) once vsl arrival, and laytime should commence at 1945lt 14th June after 12 hours turn time，however，chrts insist tt when vessel arrival , berth is available , so the valid NOR is when vessel all fast, therefore , laytime start to count on 2152lt 14th June(actual time used to count).
Pls adv whether laytime should commence once vsl arrive the port and NOR tender is valid instead of vsl arrive berth, and give us your supporting basis.
4 At 2nd discharge port ，ows insists laytime calculation should commence once vsl arrives CJK without 12 hours tt as there is not definite provision in recap or CP that allow 12 tt at 2nd discharge port. How could chrts insist laytime commence when vsl arrive taizhou anchorage regardless of WWWW.
Whether the NOR tender at CJK is valid and NOR should commence once vsl arrive CJK?
We are looking forward to your SOONEST comments and supporting documents to above questions. So many thanks.
Friends here, would you please share with us your opinions and experiences in similar cases and give us helpful advice? Many thanks.
