租约下市场价格的计算

edwardnews

请教杨先生一个问题，恳请拨冗回答：

在期租合同中，如果租约约定的承租时间是2年，比如从2008年1月1日至2010年12月31日，租金为1,000美元/天。结果承租人在2010年7月1日提前还船。

想请教杨先生的是，该如何确定此时的市场价格(market price)以计算船东的损失呢？我想到的有两种计算方式，但不知道哪种是正确的：

(1) 在市场上找一个在早还船这一天(即2010年7月1日)签订的具有类似租约条款和相同租期(即也是两年)的租约，该租约中约定的租金即为确定船东因早还船而产生损失的价格？还是

(2) 在市场上找一个在早还船这一天签订的具有类似租约条款的租约，租期为半年(即从2010年7月1日至2010年12月31日)，则该租约中约定的租金即为市场价格？

貌似书和判例也没有对此问题有明确地解释。

非常期待杨先生的答案。感谢！

edwardnews

Many thanks indeed for Mr. Yang's prompt answer.

I note that the majority of the Court of Appeal in The Johnny [1977] 2 Lloyd's Rep 1 provided a general principle on the issue of "appropriate market rate". I also note that Ernest Yang on Time Charter states the same case for explaining this particular issue. However, since Lord Denning MR was the dissenting judge, I quite doubt whether this problem is well settled by the English courts.

It is obvious that, as Mr. Yang's explanation, both the High Court (Mr. Justice Donaldson) and the majority of the Court of Appeal took the views that the relevant market rate is the market rate for the same period as the original time charter. However, Lord Denning, agreeing with the umpire of the tribunal, stated that the appropriate rate was that for a time charter trip for a voyage at that time.

One interesting point is that Lord Denning believed that his point of measurement should be acceptable from commercial reality. More interesting thing is that there is very little authority on this important issue thereafter (although I note that there was a London arbitration case share the same answer as the majoirty of The Jonny).

It appears that there is no further case on this issue has been reported to the public domain. I am interested in why no more charterers or owners challenge this point since it was only a majority judgment with Lord Denning's dissent.

Look forward to hearing Mr. Yang's comments further. Thank you very much indeed!