Monday, July 15, 2024

Interruptions & Exceptions

Interruptions & Exceptions


  1. Shifting time was excluded when on demurrage
    CLAUSE 52 VESSEL’S SHIFTING: Shifting from quarantine/place of waiting or pilot anchorage area to loading or discharging berth to be for Owners’ account and time not to count. However, costs and time used for unusual shifting hauling alongside dock and or re-shifting requested by Charterers after the Vessel has berthed to be for Charterers (sic) account..                                                                                                      Held,  whilst the shifting between anchorages continues to count as demurrage, the time spent shifting from the anchorage to the berth does not count. There was no indication in that clause that time not to count only applied to laytime and it must therefore also suspend time on demurrage. However, the shifting time between anchorages was “unusual” shifting and should count as time on demurrage.                                                                                                                                                                   (LMAA, Sole arbitrator 2011- JM)


  1. General strike clause
    At the discharge port, laytime began to run at 1400 on 4 November. A strike, of which Charterers had prior notice, started at 0800 on 6 November and ended at 0800 on 8 November. According to Owners’ calculations laytime was only claimed at 50% whilst the strike continued. The Vessel came on demurrage at 0130 on 7 November. Although the strike ended at 0800 on 8 November, rain did not permit discharge.

    Held, Owners’ statement correctly showed demurrage as running during the rain period. Charterers, on the other hand, did not allow any time for the strike and they disallowed the period of the rain stop on 8 November. According to Clause 16 (b), The General Strike Clause, time counted until the expiration of the stipulated time allowed for discharge and thereafter at half demurrage until the strike terminates. Notwithstanding Owners’ entitlement to claim in full during the laytime period, they only claimed at 50%. Once again, as there were no obvious errors in Owners’ calculation, owners were entitled to their demurrage as claimed.

(LMAA, Two arbitrators 2011- JM)