求助，这种情况下我们的滞期费可以免责吗？

tcbill

杨先生您好

我们有条普通散货船装木片到洋浦纸片码头卸木片，与船东签订的装卸条款是l/dg ttl 15 days shinc, but not weather working days. 船舶到港后，有条木片专用船已经在泊位卸货了，我们等两天后，另外一条木片专用船到港了。待到第一条木片专用船卸完后，码头说他们决定靠比我们船晚两天到港的这个木片专用船，理由是这船有皮带机，卸货速度比较快，他们一向有这个传统就是如果有普通散货船和木片专用船一起待泊，木片专用船优先靠泊。

这样一来我们船舶产生了大量的滞期费，但是我们的HEAD CHTR告诉我们这种情况下我们可以免责，因为如下一个案例：
------------qte-----------------------
In the "M/V Carlita" arbitration, a shipowner voyage chartered its vessel to carry pig iron from Sorel, Canada, to Italy. The ship arrived at Sorel and tendered its notice of readiness. The berth was occupied, and other ships were subsequently granted berthing priority by the cargo shipper. The "Carlita" then waited six days to berth.

The shipowner claimed $24,000 demurrage, which related to the priority berthing utilized at the facility. The shipowner alleged the charterer failed to disclose the berthing arrangement when the charter was negotiated. The vessel owner argued that the charterer should not be permitted to rely on the charter laytime provision, which provided that time lost waiting for berth, if beyond the charterer's control, was not to count as laytime.

The charterer argued that the vessel loading rotation was outside of its control. Moreover, the priority arrangement was a matter of common knowledge. It had no obligation to advise the vessel owner of readily accessible facts.

The arbitrators agreed with the charterer's position: "Owners could have readly determined the priority berth arrangement upon simple inquiry but, for whatever reason, chose not to do so." The arbitrators then held that the shipowner was not entitled to demurrage.

The "Carlita" arbitration suggests that vessel owners should familiarize themselves with port berthing practices during charter party negotiations in order to allocate the risk of berth delays in charter agreements.
------------------unqte------------------------------

但船东和他们的互保协会说这是美国法，我们合同时英国法，这跟我们合同没有关系，要我们必须拿滞期费，否则就通告我们。
请问杨先生，根据如上案例精神，这种情况下我们滞期费可以根据这一点免责吗？

另外，我们跟HEAD CHTRS签的是待泊时间不计装卸时间，但是放货必须提供正本提单，这这航次中，收货人的提单一直没有到，到最后卸货的时候我们根据保函放货的。请问这种情况下，我们是不是可以向HEAD CHTRS 索取DETENTION呢？

渴望得到您的指点，因为现在船东逼得很凶，但是我们租家一直在回避责任。

alasijiaxue

引用的"M/V Carlita"案提及了租约中有约定” time lost waiting for berth, if beyond the charterer's control, was not to count as laytime”，因此这个案件中本质是承租人是否可以援引这个条款抗辩。

你们的租约中有约定租家不能控制的原因导致的控泊延误，不计算为装卸时间吗？你没说明。

不太清楚你和下家要detention的依据是什么，提供保函放货耽误船舶卸货计划了吗？

tcbill

2# alasijiaxue


谢谢！

我们和船东的卸货条款是正常的卸货条款，按GENCON 94，装卸时间共15天。并没有"time waitting for berth, if out of chtrs control not count as laytime". 这一条，但是我们觉得这句话即使不说，在现实中租家无法控制的情况下一般是不算做装卸时间的。

alasijiaxue

3# tcbill


装卸时间已经起算的情形下，正常的装卸时间会不间断的计算直到装卸时间终止。如果要主张装卸时间中止计算，需要证明：

1）租约对此种情形有明确约定；或者
2）租约虽然没有约定，但是法律默示此种情形可以中止计算，如船东的过错导致的延误、船东代理的过错导致的延误等（简单的理解，大体都是和船东方相关的原因导致的延误）

结论应该已经清楚了吧。