SECTION 5 LAYTIME

1. DURATION OF LAYTIME

2. COMMENCEMENT OF LAYTIME

3. INTERRUPTIONS

4. CALCULATION

5. LAYTIME CLAUSE
 Laytime

 Laytime shall mean the period of time agreed between

the parties during which the shipowner will make and keep the
vessel available for loading or discharging without payment
additional to the freight.
 Laytime calculating is not an activity to be undertaken lightly.
There may be considerable sums of money at stake, which
will have a noticeable effect on a ship’s profitability or on a
charterer’s income.In this section we mainly deal with laytime
as well as the calculation of laytime , demurrage and despatch.
1 DURATION OF LAYTIME
Duration of laytime can be sub-divided into three categories:
 1.1 Definite laytime
 1.2 Calculable laytime
 1.3 Indefinite laytime
1.1 Definite Laytime
 The simplest of the categories, specifies how many
days/hours are allowed, whether for loading or for
discharging or for both activities, the latter sometimes
being known as for ‘all purposes’.
 Terms might be: ‘Cargo to be loaded within 5 weather
working days of 24 consecutive hours’ or ‘7 working days
of 24 consecutive hours, weather permitting, for all
purposes’.
 The use of definite laytime is the standard practice in the
tanker trades and is almost always fixed at 72 hours being
allowed for the combined loading and discharging,
regardless of the size of vessel.
1.2 Calculable Laytime
1.2.1 Tonnage Calculations
 Tonnage calculations are the most common types of calculable
laytime. A contract will state that a vessel is to load and/or
discharge at a set rate of tons/tonnes per day/hour. Thus, for a
ship loading 40,000 metric tones of cargo,
minimum/maximum, at a rate of 10,000 tones daily, there will
be 4 days of laytime available to her charterers.
 However, it might be that the ship’s master has a margin
within which to load - e.g. 40,000 tones (5% more or less).
Thus, if the ship eventually loaded 41,258 tonnes of cargo,
available laytime can be assessed as follows:
 41,258 tonnes ÷ 10,000 tonnes daily = 4.1258 days
 1.2.2 Hatch Calculations
 Hatch calculations are more complicated than
tonnage calculations but occasionally need to be
performed, nonetheless, there are well-established
procedures to assist.
  Let us assume that general cargo vessel
‘HERON’ is discharging bagged wheat flour on
the basis of: “A discharge rate of 175 tonnes per
hatch daily, total cargo of 7,000 tonnes, 1575
tonnes cargo in the largest cargo compartment
and vessel has five (5) hatches”.
 1.2.2.1 Per Hatch Daily
 PER HATCH PER DAY shall mean that the laytime is to be
calculated by dividing (A), the quantity of cargo, by (B), the
result of multiplying the agreed daily rate per hatch by the
number of the vessel’s hatches. Thus:
 Laytime = (Quantity of cargo)/(Daily Rate × Number of Hatches)
= Days
 Each pair of parallel twin hatches shall count as one hatch.
Nevertheless, a hatch that is capable of being worked by two
gangs simultaneously shall be counted as two hatches.
  The vessel is to be discharged at 175 tonnes per hatch daily.
 Thus 5 (hatches) x 175 tones = 875 tonnes daily,
Thus 7,000 tones cargo ÷ 875 = 8 days permitted laytime.
 1.2.2.2 Per Workable Hatch Ddaily
 ‘PER WORKING HATCH PER DAY’ (WHD) or ‘PER
WORKABLE HATCH PER DAY’ (WHD) shall mean that
the laytime is to be calculated by dividing (A), the quantity of
cargo in the hold with the largest quantity, by (B), the result
of multiplying the agreed daily rate per working or workable
hatch by the number of hatches serving that hold, Thus:
 Laytime = (Largest Quantity in one Hold)/(Daily Rate per
Hatch × Number of Hatches serving that Hold.) = Days
 Each pair of parallel twin hatches shall count as one hatch.
Nevertheless, a hatch that is capable of being worked by two
gangs simultaneously shall be counted as two hatches.
 Taking the above example of the ‘HERON’, first it is
necessary to establish the ‘largest’ unit of cargo in the
vessel. Reference to the ‘stowage plan’ shows that 1,575
tones contained in No. 3 hold and tweendeck beneath No. 3
hatch constitutes the ‘largest’ unit.
 Thus 1,575 tones ÷ 175 daily = 9 days laytime overall.
  However, where two or more hatches serve the largest unit
of cargo, the unit tonnage must be sub-divided. Assuming
two hatches served No. 3 hold and tweendeck, for example,
1,575 tonnes would first be divided by 2 before applying the
factor of 175 tonnes daily. In that case, the largest
indivisible cargo unit would become the 1,500 tonnes
contained in No. 2 hold and tweendeck and the laytime
duration calculation would then be:
 1,500 tones ÷ 175 daily = 8.571428 days laytime.
 1.3 Indefinite Laytime
 Occasionally, an shipowner or operator will agree
for his ship to be loaded or discharged as per
‘custom of the port’ (COP); ‘customary despatch’
(CD); ‘customary quick despatch’ (CQD) or ‘fast
as can’ (FAC) terms.
 The risk of bad weather, port congestion and
such like are all for the Shipowner / operator to
bear.
2 COMMENCEMENT OF LAYTIME
2.1 The vessel must have ‘arrived’ at the place where
cargo operations are to be performed;
2.2 The vessel must in all respects be ready to load
or discharge the relevant cargo;
2.3 The notice of readiness must be tendered.
 2.1 Arrived ship
 In general, laytime commences when a vessel is an “arrived ship”.
Simply put it could be considered the time that the vessel arrives at
the agreed place. Therefore, the more detailed the description of
that place the more careful the shipowner must be to reach that
place.
 Whether a ship is an arrived ship will depend on whether the
charter party is a port charter party or a berth charter party. “The
vessel shall proceed to Ras Tanura” is less onerous than “The
vessel shall proceed to No.2 berth Tas Tanura”. The former is
known as a “port charter” and the latter a “berth charter”. If the
vessel berths on arrival without delay there can be no disagreement
as to when the vessel is ready and the “clock starts” but if there is a
delay the situation is less clear.
 2.1.1 Berth charter parties
 ‘BERTH’ shall mean the specific place within a port where the
vessel is to load or discharge.
 If the word ‘BERTH’ is not used, but the specific place is (or is to
be) identified by its name, this definition shall still apply.
 Where the charter parties expressly reserve to the charterer the
right to name a particular dock or berth, the laytime do not begin
until the ship has arrived at that dock or berth. The duty to reach
this agreed point or place for loading or discharging is very tough
on the shipowners. Even if the vessel has to wait at the immediate
vicinity for the particular berth agreed in the charter party, the
vessel is not considered to have arrived. Therefore any loss of time
in waiting for the berth to become vacant will fall on the
shipowners.
 WIBON
 Nowadays it is more common to find port charter parties.
Admittedly many charter parties are agreed on the basis of one
safe berth, one safe port, and that technically is still a berth
charter party. But there is the usual provision of “whether in
berth or not” inserted in the charter parties and that will
effectively expand a berth charter party into a port charter
party.
  ‘WHETHER IN BERTH OR NOT’ (WIBON) shall mean that
if no loading or discharging berth is available on her arrival the
vessel, on reaching any usual waiting-place at or off the port,
shall be entitled to ender notice of readiness from it and
laytime shall commence in accordance with the charterparty.
Laytime or time on demurrage shall cease to count once the
berth becomes available and shall resume when the vessel is
ready to load or discharge at the berth.
 2.1.2 Port charter parties
 ‘PORT’ shall mean an area, within which vessels load or
discharge cargo whether at berths, anchorages, buoys, or
the like, and shall also include the usual places where
vessels wait for their turn or are ordered or obliged to
wait for their turn no matter the distance from that area. If
the word ‘PORT’ is not used, but the port is (or is to be)
identified by its name, this definition shall still apply.
  The English courts once held that the vessel must be
within the commercial area of the port and this had been
amended to mean the “normal waiting area for a port”.
The importance, of course, being as to who will pay for
the time waiting for a berth or the commencement of the
cargo operation.
 Rule and case
 The rule is that the charter party names a port simply, without further
particularity or qualification, the ship is an arrived ship when, if she
cannot proceed immediately to a berth, she has reached a position
within the port where she is at the immediate and effective disposition
of the charterer. If she is at the place where waiting ships usually lie,
she is in such a position unless there are some extraordinary
circumstances, proof of which lies on the charterer.
 A vessel carrying grain under a port charter party anchored at the Bar
anchorage at Liverpool. The anchorage was 17 miles from the usual
discharging berth, but was the usual place where grain vessels lay while
awaiting a berth. Held by the House of Lords that she was an arrived
ship when she reached the anchorage, for she was then at the immediate
and effective disposition of the charterer.
2.1.3 Port Congestion
 Port congestion is now commonplace and brings with it a
further worry for shipowners in that it is the reason for
most cases of lengthy delay and the accruing of huge
demurrage. Who must bear the financial risk of delay in a
congested port will depend on what is stated in the charter
party.
 Contracts usually specify that notices of readiness can be
tendered from a normal waiting place, whether in port or
not (WIPON), whether in berth or not (WIBON), whether
in free pratique or not (WIFPON) and whether custom’s
cleared or not (WCCON). The above terms are often
combined into the one abbreviation ‘WWWW’.
 Kyzikos case
 WIBON was designed to convert a berth charter party
into a port charter party and to ensure that under a berth
charter party notice of readiness could be given as soon as
the ship had arrived within the port concerned so that
laytime could start to run on its expiry. But English law
has restricted the meaning of WIBON somewhat. That is
in the Kyzikos.
 The Kyzikos was fixed to load a cargo of steel products in
Italy for Houston. In the charter party in the Gencon form,
the discharge port or place was state as “1/2 safe always
afloat, always accessible berth(s) each port-----.” So it was a
“berth” charter. But Clause 5 stated: “Time to commence at
2 pm if notice of readiness is given before noon at 8 am next
working day if notice given during office hours after noon.
Time to count ---- WIPON/WIBON/WIFPON/WCCON----”
 The Kyzikos arrived at Houston, the discharge port, at
0645H on December 17, 1984. Notice of readiness was
tendered by the master soon enough. The berth she was
supposed to proceed to was available at all times. However,
as fog had closed the pilot station, she could not proceed
untill December 20, 1984, on which date she was berthed at
1450H.
 The shipowners claimed that laytime commenced at
1400H on December 17. But the charterers, maintained
that WIBON was not protection for the shipowners if the
berth was available and the vessel was prevented from
berthing due to other reasons beyond the control of the
charterers. Thus, the charterers would only accept laytime
commencing after the vessel became an “arrived” ship
when she berthed on December 20. Only a little over
three days demurrage was in dispute ----US$30,435.72 ---
but the case was taken all the way to the House of Lords.
 In arbitration, it was decided that the shipowners’ claim
succeeded in full on the ground that “on well established
authority the words had the effect of making the charter
into a port charter.”
 On appeal in the High Court, the award was reversed. It
was held that there was no previous decision of any court
which was binding on him on the point. The Lord said
“when a vessel is unable to come alongside because no
berth is available, the WIBON provision in the ordinary
case has, in practice, that effect; but in my view it cannot
be said without doubt that the authorities which I have
considered, read as a whole, support the proposition that it
has that effect in law, still less that it actually converts a
berth charter into a port charter”.
 In the Court of Appeal, however, the arbitration award
was restored again and it was held that WIBON turned a
berth charter into a port charter so that time commenced
to run when the vessel was waiting in the named port of
destination to proceed to berth.
 In the House of Lords, finally, the Court of Appeal’s decision
was unanimously reversed. Lord Brandon gave the only
reasoned speech. It appeared the main reason for the House of
Lords’ decision was based on the absence of any reported case
which applied the WIBON to any cause of delay other than the
non-availability of a berth, thus justifying the inference that
purpose of WIBON was only for the limited application of non-
availability of berth/congestion. Lord Brandon has said that
“whether in berth or not” was the shorthand for “whether in
berth (a berth being available) or not in berth (a berth not being
available).”
  It is clear that WIBON will still protect the shipowners in the
event of a port congestion, hence preventing the vessel in berth
charter to become an arrived ship. WIPON would be even better
in protecting the shipowners if the waiting for the nominated
berth to be free is not within the port limit.
 2.1.4 Time lost in waiting for berth to count
 “Time lost in waiting for berth to count as laytime”
is a well-known printed clause that can be found in
the Gencon form of charter and is freely incorporated
by many shipowners in the rider clauses of other
forms of voyage charter parties.
 It is a further important provision aimed at relieving
shipowners of the hardship caused by narrow
interpretation of the “arrived ship” under English
law. The purpose of the clause is to make charterers
assume the financial burden of the risk of waiting for
a berth due to congestion--- be it a port charter or
berth charter.

Case study
The Darrah was chartered to carry a cargo of cement from Novorossisk in the
Black Sea to Tripoli. The charter party was a port charter based on the Gencon
form. The Darrah duly completed her carrying voyage and reached a usual
waiting place for her turn within the limits of the port of Tripoli. The Darrah
rightly gave notice of readiness to discharge on January 2 1973, laytime being
triggered off shortly after the notice time. The Darrah had to wait for an available
discharge berth for over seven days. That seven days and six hours, included two
non-working days, a Friday (non working day in Tripoli) and a legal holiday, and
a period from noon on the day before each. If this seven days and six hours
waiting time counted, as proper laytime, the non-working period would have to
be disallowed under the charter party. The shipowners claimed that the whole of
the seven days and six hours would have to be counted continuously under the
“time lost” provision, because it took priority over the “laytime” provision. This
would effectively exhaust all the laytime (eight days and seven hours) save for
only 25 hours. These 25 hours were promptly used after berthing and so, the
shipowner argued, the vessel was thereafter on demurrage counting continuously
without applying any excepted periods for the benefit of the charterers. The
shipowners ended up with 10 more days on demurrage than the charterers would
admit.

Case
In the High Court, it was held that where time was lost waiting for berth,
all the time so lost was to count whenever and wherever the waiting took
place, and the special exceptions with regard to laytime calculation would
only operate until the berth was ready.
 When it came to the Court of Appeal, it was held that the ship was an
arrived ship, the laytime provisions would apply, with all the exceptions to
be applied.
 In the House of Lords, justice was further expanded. The House of Lords
now had the chance to correct the earlier decisions and held that the “time
lost” provision would have to be computed exactly like the permissible
laytime calculation, as if the vessel had actually been berthed. So in the
case of an arrived ship under a port charter, there is no conflict between
the laytime clauses and the “time lost” provision, because both calculations
are the same and neither need prevail over the other. But even in the berth
outside the port would still be counted as the laytime with all the
exceptions like Sunday and holidays being excluded.  
Voylayrules 93
 According to the “Voylayrules 93”, the “time lost”
provision shall mean that if no loading or discharging
berth is available and the vessel is unable to tender notice
of readiness at the waiting-place then any time lost to the
vessel shall count as if laytime were running, or as time
on demurrage if laytime has expired. Such time shall
cease to count once the berth becomes available.
 When the vessel reaches a place where she is able to
tender notice of readiness laytime or time on demurrage
shall resume after such tender and, in respect of laytime,
on expiry of any notice time provided in the charterparty.
2.2 Readiness
 Not only must a ship have arrived under
the charter party but she must also be ready
in order to tender effective Notice of
Readiness so as to trigger off the laytime
clock.
 Readiness means that the vessel must be in
all respects ready to load or to discharge in
both the legal and physical sense.
 
2.2.1 Legal Readiness
2.2.1.1 Free pratique
 Requirement for free pratique is a legal readiness that a
vessel has to fulfil. It used to be harsh on the shipowners.
 In normal circumstances free pratique is mere formality.
However the time for its granting depends entirely on the
custom of the particular port that the vessel is calling at.
 Some ports make it very simple by radio if the vessel’s
last port of call is a healthy place. Some ports are the
other extreme that free pratique could not be obtained
from the authority in accordance with the port regulations
in force until the vessel had actually berthed.
 Case
 A vessel reached the commercial area of Tuapse at 0100
hours on 19 February. Her master gave notice of
readiness to load. She was directed to her berth on 24
February and arrived there at 1320 hours. Free pratique
was granted at 1600 hours. Loading began at 2150 hours.
 It was held that the mere fact that free pratique had not
been obtained did not prevent the vessel from being able
to commence the laytime counting, as long as the free
pratique could be obtained at any time and without the
possibility of delaying the loading or discharging. The
Delian Spirit [1971] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 506.
 2.2.1.2 Customs clearance

 Normally this is again an idle formality. If

the vessel supplies copies of cargo manifest
and other necessary documents customs
clearance will be almost automatic. But if
shipowners voluntarily or negligently permit
the customs clearance as a condition
precedent in the charter party before the
ability to tender notice of readiness they can
be caught badly. 
 Case
 The vessel, Puerto Rocca, arrived at the Mersey Bar anchorage
and gave notice of readiness to the charterers. The charterers
rejected on the ground that the vessel was not custom cleared
in accordance with the clause. It was not possible for a vessel
to obtain customs clearance at Mersey Bar. So the shipowners,
whilst maintaining the validity of the notice of readiness
tendered upon arrival at the anchorage, took effort and expense
to procure a lay-by berth in Seaforth Dock for the vessel, so as
to obtain custom clearance and then served a second notice of
readiness four days later than the first one, but without
prejudice to it.
 It was held by the High Court that the first notice of readiness
was valid and the clause entitled him to do so if she was unable
to berth immediately on arrival.
2.2.2 Physical readiness
 A ship must be physically capable of performing cargo-
operations – e.g. at a loading port, holds must be cleaned
and prepared for receiving cargo and, if the contract so
specifies, holds must be inspected and declared suitable
by an appropriate authority before notice of readiness will
be accepted.
 In general providing that all the space requited for the
carriage of the contracted cargo is reasonably clean,
available and accessible the ship would be considered
ready unless there was some overriding clause in the
charterparty which stipulated conditions beyond these.
2.2.2.1 Seaworthiness

 The vessel must of course be seaworthy. But it seems

she need not be seaworthy in the sense of being ready
and able to sail to the open sea, unless of course she
cannot even shift to the loading or discharging berth
designated and/or safely to load or to discharge cargo.
 Therefore the vessel is perfectly entitled to tender
notice of readiness, and have laytime commenced
while simultaneously effecting repairs to the main or
auxiliary engines, or having bunker supplied in
preparation for sailing after cargo work.
2.2.2.2 Cargo holds
and inspection
 The ship must be completely ready in all her holds so as
to afford the charterers complete control of every portion
of the ship available for cargo. Unless there is an express
provision in the charter party that notice of readiness may
not be tendered until after inspection by the charterer’s
inspector or other relevant authority, then if the vessel is
in all respects ready to load and all that is required is a
routine inspection of holds in which nothing is found to
cause delay for the loading, then such inspection is a mere
idle formality and not a condition precedent to the ability
to tender notice of readiness and commencement of
laytime.
2.2.2.3 Cargo gears

 It appears that the rule for readiness to load

or to discharge applicable to cargo gear is
not as stringent as the rule for cargo space.
The vessel is ready to tender the notice of
readiness if the facts reveal that the loading
or discharging method does not require the
use of ship’s gears or shore crane could be
readily employed.
 Case
 The vessel, Demosthenes, arrived at Alexandria on the May 26, 1983 and
tendered notice of readiness. It was rejected on the ground that the vessel did
not have the necessary vacuators for the discharging according to clause 18
which stated that shipowner to supply sufficient vacuators and consequently
the vessel was not considered ready for discharge. To the shipowner, it looked
like the charterer was finding any excuse to decline the notice of readiness to
avoid laytime from commencing, when it was known there would be
prolonged delay in berthing. So the shipowner was forced to take precautions
to make the notice of readiness mature just in case. Three vacuators were
arranged to be put on board two days later on May 29, and another three were
put on board on June 15, enabling the master to re-tender a second notice of
readiness on June 17, without prejudice to the earlier one. The vessel
eventually berthed July 12. The shipowner claimed demurrage. The charterer
resisted, contending the vessel was not ready without vacuators.
 The Judge held that the vacuators were essentially equipment which was to
emerge from the shore when the operation of discharge was to commence; the
vessel as a vessel was ready. Therefore the notice of readiness on arrival
Alexandria was a valid notice of readiness.
 2.2.2.4 Lightening at discharge port
 Arrival draft for the discharge port or berth can be a
serious matter. It may hamper the ability of the vessel to
go alongside to commence discharge, unless lightening is
carried out at outer anchorage until desired draft is met. In
that case, if the charter party is explicit on the arrival
draft, this must affect the vessel’s ability to tender and
effective notice of readiness.
 But more often, the overdraft is minimal and does not
effect the ability to go alongside a discharging berth, and
the sole reason that the vessel is waiting at an outer
anchorage is congestion of the port.
 2.3 Notice of readiness
 Notice of readiness (NOR) shall mean the notice to
charterer, shipper, receiver or other person as required by
the charterparty that the vessel has arrived at the port or
berth, as the case may be, and is ready to load or discharge.
 Laytime for loading and discharging shall commence at
13.00 hours, if notice of readiness is given up to and
including 12.00 hours, and at 06.00 hours next working day
if notice given during office hours after 12.00 hours.
 Notice of readiness at loading port to be given to the
shippers or if not named, to the charterers or their agents
named in charter party. Notice of readiness at the
discharging port to be given to the receivers or, if not
known, to the charterers or their agents
 2.3.1 Valid notice of readiness
 Notice of Readiness can be given orally but usually a written form is used, an
example of which can be found in Appendix. It is an important function of a
port agent to assist a ship’s Master in tendering notice of a ship’s arrival and
also to ensure that shippers/receivers officially ‘accept’ the vessel’s notice of
readiness, accomplished usually by signing and timing acceptance on the
notice form, although many shippers/receivers or Charterers’ nominated port
agents, will ‘accept subject to charterparty terms and conditions’.
  It should be noted that the giving of a notice of readiness is an essential
element in the laytime process. Furthermore, a ship’s Master or agent must
have tendered Notice of Readiness, in accordance with the contract
requirements (e.g. ‘within office hours, Mondays to Fridays’). It is not
however conclusive proof that the ship is in fact ready. Since the Master gives
the notice of readiness it is in truth only his opinion that the ship is ready. On
final inspection the Charterer may not agree and refuse to accept the notice of
readiness.
 A notice of readiness is not valid unless it indicates that the vessel is ready to
load or discharge as the case may be, at the time at which it is given. It is
insufficient if the notice merely indicates that she will be ready at a future
time.
The
  Mexico I
 The Mexico I had been chartered to carry 5000 tons of bagged maize
from Argentina to Angola. It was a part cargo and the shipowners
were expressly given the right to complete the vessel with other
lawful merchandise. The vessel did load other cargo at Santos after
loading the 5000 tons of bagged maize at Necochea.
 The vessel arrived at Luanda, Angola, and gave notice of readiness
on January 20, 1985. However, it was not until February 6, 1985 that
the overstowed cargo was cleared and the maize cargo became
accessible. It was even later February 19, 1985 before a start was
made on unloading the bagged maize.
 The arbitration was in favour of the shipowners for the “bad” notice
of readiness tendered on January 20 became “effective” or “revived”
when the maize cargo was fully accessible on February 6.
 The charterers appealed to the court. In upholding the award in the
shipowner’s favour, the court said that the facts of the particular case
show that the charterers no longer have the right to insist upon a further
notice of readiness being given. The correct conclusion in law is that
the notice became effective on the time 1025 on February 6.
 The charterers took the matter further to the Court of Appeal. It was
held to be wrong insofar as it suggested that when a notice of readiness
was given before the vessel was in fact ready, no further notice of
readiness was required. The notion that the invalid notice of readiness
became inchoate and automatically became effective without further
notice at the moment when the ship was actually ready, was rejected.
As a result, the charterers’ appeal was allowed and the laytime started
to count, not from the moment of the invalid notice of readiness on
January 1, 1985, not from the time the vessel was ready physically and
cleared of overstowed cargo on February 6, 1985, but from the
moment of actual discharge given later, at 1130 on February 19, 1985.
 2.3.2 Arrival Before Laydays
(1)Meaning of Laycan
 It is usual in any charterparty to specify ‘laycan’ dates. ‘Laycan’
is an abbreviation of laydays/canceling date. Laydays being the
time when the commencement of loading is contracted to take
place and canceling date being the point at which, if the ship has
not arrived at the load port, the Charterer is free to cancel the
contract.
 In practice the ‘laycan’ consists of a spread of dates although it
is not uncommon for a single date to be specified for both.
 (2)Giving NOR before laydays
 There is nothing to prevent a vessel that arrives before her laydays are due to start
from giving notice of readiness. From a legal viewpoint laytime will start to count
in accordance with the relevant terms of the c/p. However the period between then
and the point at which the agreed laydays commence will be excluded time under
the c/p terms.
 There are advantages to the Owner when giving notice before laydays particularly
in the dry cargo trades. This is because Dry cargo charters usually require notice to
be given in office hours with laytime starting to commence at the beginning of the
next work period following. By giving notice before laydays it is likely that the
time allowed to the Charterer will have passed and that therefore time will start to
count at 00:00 hours on the first layday. Had the notice been given during office
hours in the first layday time would only have started to count at 13:00 or 14:00 on
that day.
 In order to avoid such situations Charterers will try to include clauses expressly
prohibiting presentation of the notice of readiness before the commencement of
laydays.
(3)Commencement of laytime
 Once a vessel has arrived at a port, complied with all
formalities and contractual commitments and
tendered notice of readiness, laytime will commence
in accordance with the contract terms – e.g. ‘at 0700
hours next working day’ or ‘ 12 hours following
tendering and accepting notice of readiness’.
 For the tanker trades it is common practice to allow
the tendering of the notice of readiness to take place
at any time on any day and for time to begin to count
6 hours later.
 (4)Different of time counting and actual
loading or discharging
 It is important to remember that the commencement of time counting
and the commencement of actual loading or discharging can, under
certain circumstances, be quite different.
 Take, for example, a charterparty with 36 hours turn time ‘even if used’
also Sundays and Holidays excepted ‘even if used’ and Notice of
Readiness to be given during normal office hours. Such a ship could
arrive at, say, 6 pm on a Friday, work the entire weekend and time
would not commence to count until 36 hours after 8 am Monday. Such
a ship would have been working for over four days before time even
commences to count. Vital, therefore, to ensure also that Notice of
Readiness is handed in at the earliest permissible moment. Never think
that as work has already started a Notice of Readiness is not needed.
 2.3.3 Overstowage
 A charter entered into under the Gencon form for the carriage of part cargo
of flour, liberty was given in the charter for the shipowner to top up with
general cargo en route. This the shipowner did overstowing above flour in
four out of the five cargo holds. At the discharge port, argument arose on
whether effective notice of readiness could be tendered until all
overstowed cargo was removed and all flour cargo was accessible? The
shipowner argued that he had an express right to complete with cargo en
route, which necessarily meant to overstow. The shipowner did nothing
wrong in that. The charterer submitted that an overstowed cargo is exactly
like a jammed hatch cover, effectively blocking the charterer’s cargo.
 It was held that the charterer was right in his contention. Laytime did not
begin to run until all the flour cargo was accessible, and there was no
difference between loading and discharging in that all holds for the
intended cargo must be ready in all respects so as to give the charterer
complete control of every portion. In the later case of The Mexico I as
previous mentioned gives the same result.
3. INTERRUPTIONS
Once laytime has commenced, unless a vessel’s cargo-
handling equipment breaks down, it will continue
unhindered until the completion of cargo operations or until
laytime expires or demurrage commences. Nevertheless,
contracts frequently include express clauses interrupting
laytime in the event of:
3.1 Weekends and Holidays
3.2 Shifting to and Between Anchorages/Berths
3.3 Strikes
3.4 Bad Weather
3.5 Breakdowns
3.1 Weekends and Holidays
 SHEX terms (Sundays and Holidays Excepted)
 FHEX terms (Fridays and Holidays Excepted)
 SHINC (Sundays and Holidays Inclusive)
 FHINC (Fridays and Holidays Inclusive)
 SSHEX (Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays Excepted)
 SSHINC (Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays Inclusive)
 Meaning of day
 ‘DAY’ shall mean a period of twenty-four consecutive
hours running from 0000 to 2400 hours. Any part of a day
shall be counted pro rate.
 Running days or consecutive days shall mean days which
follow one immediately after the other.
 “Working days” shall mean days not expressly excluded
from laytime.
 “Weather working day” shall mean a working day of 24
consecutive hours except for any time when weather
prevents the loading or discharging of the vessel or would
have prevented it, had work been in progress.
3.2 Shifting to and Between
Anchorages/Berths
 It is common practice for contract wording to permit
loading/discharging at more than one berth or anchorage at each
port. Consequently, time spent shifting between berths/anchorages
is normally taken to be for shipowner’s account.
 However, should the agreed number of berths/anchorages be
exceeded, it becomes reasonable that the shifting time involved
should count as laytime and that the expenses involved – e.g.
towage and pilotage – should also be for the account of the
Charterers.
 In almost all trades if the vessel has anchored off on arrival either
to wait for suitable tides or a free berth the time taken to shift to
the berth is excluded from laytime.
3.3 Strikes
 ‘STRIKE’ shall mean a concerted industrial action by
workmen causing a complete stoppage of their work which
directly interferes with the working of the vessel. Refusal to
work overtime, go-slow or working to rule and comparable
actions not causing a complete stoppage shall not be
considered a strike. A strike shall be understood to exclude its
consequences when it has ended, such as congestion in the
port or effects upon the means of transportation bringing or
taking the cargo to or from the port.
 There is nearly always an express clause in a contract
to the effect that delays due to shore strikes are not to
count as laytime.
 3.4 Bad Weather
(1)weather working days
 WEATHER WORKING DAY’ (WWD) or ‘WEATHER WORKING DAY
OF 24 HOURS’ OR ‘WEATHER WORKING DAY OF 24 CONSECUTIVE
HOURS’ shall mean a working day of 24 consecutive hours except for any
time when weather prevents the loading or discharging of the vessel or would
have prevented it, had work been in progress.

(2)days, weather permitting

 ‘WEATHER PERMITTING’ (WP) shall mean that any time when weather
prevents the loading or discharging of the vessel shall not count as laytime.
 For many years it had been accepted that the former expression favoured
Charterers and the latter favoured shipowners.
 (3)Explanation of WWD
 In cases of ‘weather working days’, laytime does not count
during periods of bad weather that interrupt loading or
discharging nor (and this is the important factor) does laytime
count when bad weather occurs during a working day even if,
had the weather been fine, no attempt would have been made to
work. ‘Weather working day’ describes a type of working day.
It does not matter whether the vessel was actually working or
not.
 It follows, therefore, that even if a ship is not actually on the
loading (or discharging) berth, for example because it is
occupied by another ship, if time has started to run and bad
weather occurs during a working day, that time will not count
against Charterers as laytime.
(4) Working day
 A working day not only refers to a day when work normally
take place, it is also that part of the day when work is
normally done in the port in question. If, therefore, the word
‘working’ were not qualified in any way, the bad weather
would have to occur during the port working part of the day
for it to be deducted from the laytime.
 Conversely, where the charterparty reads ‘weather working
day of 24 consecutive hours’ (which is now more normal),
then bad weather occurring at any time (once laytime had
started to run) would be deductible even if the Charterer had
no intention of working during such a period.
 (5) Days weather permitting
 In cases of ‘days, weather permitting’ it was understood until 1982
that only working time actually interrupted by bad weather would fail
to count as laytime.
 All this, however, was before the case of the ‘VORRAS’ in that year,
that vessel was a tanker and the judges of the English Court of Appeal
has to determine the meaning of the term '72 running hours, weather
permitting, Sundays and holidays included┈┈’, where the vessel was
kept from a loading berth for some days owing to bad weather. They
held that bad weather at the time was such as to prevent the loading of
a vessel of the ‘VORRAS’ type and as such, laytime should not count.
In other words, that decision on a tanker has effective eroded the long-
held and sacred distinction in the dry-cargo market between ‘weather
working’ and ‘weather permitting’.
(6) Days of 24 consecutive hours
 Where the term ‘days of 24 consecutive hours’ is
incorporated into a charterparty laytime provisions – and
this is the term used in almost all modern dry-cargo
charterparties – it in effect means that a laytime day will
run continuously for 24 hours each day, unless specifically
interrupted by some charterparty factor such as a weekend
or holiday, bad weather or a strike.
 It is of no consequence whether the ‘working day’ of a
port is of less than 24 hours. The parties to the contract
have agreed, in effect, to ignore port ‘working days’ and to
define a ‘laytime day’ as running continuously for 24
hours, except for any specified interruptions.
(7) WWD without qualification
 The term ‘weather working day’ on its own without
qualification is indeed affected by the number of hours
actually worked in a port. Should bad weather occur
outside working periods in the normal, non-working and
otherwise idle time, laytime will not be affected.
 However, if bad weather occurs in normal working time,
even if the vessel was idle at the time, laytime will be
interrupted and the degree of interruption has to be
reached by apportioning working time in a port against a
24-hour day. 
Day 1 Worked 0700/1900 1.0 day 24 hours
Day 2 Worked 0700/1900 1.0 day 24 hours
Rain 2200/2400
Day 3 Rain 0001/2400 0.0 day 00 hours
Day 4 Rain 0070/1900 0.0 day 00 hours
Day 5 Worked 0700/1300 0.5 day 12 hours
Rain 1300/1900
Day 6 Worked 0700/1000 0.25 day 06 hours
Rain 1000/1900
Day 7 Rain 0700/1000 0.75day 18 hours
Worked 1000/1900
3.5 Breakdowns
 It is reasonable that if a vessel’s gear is being
used and it breaks down, laytime should not
continue during the period of breakdown.
 It may be that, for example, one crane out of four
has broken down and, in such a case;
apportionment of the degree of loss must be
carried out. In that relatively simple example,
laytime would continue at a rate of 75% until the
crane is repaired.
 Shore breakdaown
 There are, however, shore breakdowns and it may be that the
shipowners have knowingly or unwittingly assumed
responsibility for these in their contract.
 Some charterparties exclude time lost due to stoppages of
shore machinery ‘beyond the Charterers’ control’, which
means just that under English law. Thus a shore crane
breakdown that is judged to be ‘beyond Charterers’ control’
(i.e. Charterers do not own or otherwise ‘control’ the crane)
such a breakdown will, therefore, interrupt laytime.
 Under American law it may be that the alternative view
would be upheld, in the shipowners’ favour, although that is
not completely certain.
4. CALCULATION

 4.1 Damages for detention

 4.2 Demurrage
 4.3 Despatch money
 4.4 Averaging laytime
 4.1 Damages for detention
 If Charterers fail to abide by the provisions of a contract
and, as a result, permitted laytime is exceeded, shipowners
are normally entitled to reimbursement for their loss, if any.
 One method of reimbursement could be by claiming
‘damages for detention’, however this could be a lengthy
and costly legal exercise.
 Consequently, most parties to a shipping contract avoid the
problem by negotiating a daily level of ‘demurrage’ for the
time spent in excess of agreed laytime.
 The difference between demurrage and damages for
detention is that demurrage is only be paid for an agreed
number of days and damages for detention is to be paid for
further delay takes place.
Gencon Form 76
 It is rare to find a similar provision like Clause 7
in the Gencon form 76 limiting only to ten days
on demurrage. Naturally, under such a provision,
if the vessel continues to be delayed, the
charterers will have to pay damages for detention
beyond the ten days. This is cumbersome to say
the least. It is only to be expected that this
provision is no longer to be found in the new
Gencon form 94.
 4.2 Demurrage
 Once laytime has been fully used, demurrage should normally run
continuously, night and day, weekend and working period, with no
interruptions until cargo work is completed unless the contract
expressly provides otherwise – e.g. ‘shifting time from anchorage
to berth not to count as laytime or as time on demurrage’.
 Normally, however, laytime interruptions such as bad weather,
weekends and holidays, will not interfere with demurrage time,
although breakdowns on a vessel affecting discharge will interrupt
demurrage time.
 Given these exceptions, it can usually be said that the much used
shipping expression: ‘once on demurrage, always on demurrage’
means what it says.
4.3 Despatch money
 It has already been stated despatch is not a feature of the tanker
market. Within the dry cargo markets it can be agreed that if a vessel
completes cargo operations within the available laytime, the
Charterer will be rewarded by the payment of despatch money, which
is normally set at half the daily rate of demurrage.
 It should be borne in mind, however, that a few Charterers negotiate
that daily despatch is the same as daily demurrage, while, by contrast,
for vessels that normally might expect a fast turn-round in port – e.g.
ro-ro ships, car carriers or coasters – it is not at all unusual for the
contract to specify ‘free despatch’ – i.e. no despatch at all .
 However, no address commissions or brokerages are payable on
despatch money. Where despatch is payable. It can be sub-divided as
being payable on:
4.3.1 All time saved

 ‘DESPATCH ON ALL TIME SAVED’ (ATS)

shall mean that dispatch money shall be payable
for the time from the completion of loading or
discharging to the expiry of the laytime including
periods excepted from the laytime. It is perhaps
easier to understand despatch on ‘all time saved’
by the use of an example.
Example
 The ‘HERON’ completes loading at 1200 hours on a Friday,
her charterparty being ‘per weather working day of 24
consecutive hours, Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays
excepted, even if used’. Thus laytime would be suspended in
normal circumstances from Friday 2400 hours through to
Monday 0001 hours.
 At 1200 hours on Friday there are 3 days of laytime
remaining and, since the term ‘all time saved’ means exactly
what it says, the calculator of laytime has to base figures on
the hypothetical case that ‘if the vessel had not completed
loading on the Friday at 1200 hours but had remained in port
working cargo when would laytime have been fully used’?
Despatch would thus be calculated in the following fashion:
All time saved Laytime
Friday 1200/2400 hours 12 hours
Saturday 0000/2400 0 hours
Sunday 0000/2400 0 hours
Monday 0000/2400 24 hours
Tuesday 0000/2400 24 hours
Wednesday 0000/1200 12 hours
5 days 3 days
 Allowing for the weekend that has been ‘saved’ by the Charterers due to
their finishing before the expiry of permitted laytime, they have in effect
‘saved’ the Shipowner some 5 days and, under ‘all time saved’ terms,
are thus entitled to 5 days despatch.
4.3.2 Working time or laytime saved
 ‘DESPATCH ON (ALL) WORKING TIME SAVED’
(WTS) or ‘ON (ALL) LAYTIME SAVED’ shall mean
that dispatch money shall be payable for the time from the
completion of loading or discharging to the expiry of the
laytime excluding any periods excepted from the laytime.
 Using the same example but on the basis of ‘working
time’ or ‘laytime saved’, only the 3 remaining days of
laytime would apply as despatch, despite weekends or
holidays or bad weather or any other factor occurring
once the ship had departed.
 The question remains, however, is ‘working time saved’ the
same as ‘laytime saved’? With laytime described as ‘a day of
24 consecutive hours’ it will be the same. Otherwise, if one is
involved in apportioning ‘working time ‘ in the manner
shown under 5.4 above, then despatch should be apportioned
in the same manner.
 You will readily see that ‘despatch on all time saved’ favours
the Charterer whilst ‘laytime saved’ or ‘working time saved’
is better for the shipowner; the ‘fairness’ of one versus the
other is a perpetual debate. The shipowners naturally say that
as laytime excepts certain periods like Sunday and holidays
then despatch should be on the same basis. The Charterer
counters this by arguing that a ship is earning all the time she
is at sea regardless of which day of the week it is so that
getting the ship to sea that much quicker should reward the
Charterer for every day without exception.
 Note
 One final word about despatch, it should be borne in mind
that some markets (e.g. bulk sugar) are based on laytime
far in excess of the time actually required to perform
cargo operations. It is, therefore, important for
shipowners to take this into account when negotiating
business and to reflect the ‘saved’ time as a ‘despatch
expense’ in a voyage estimate.
4.4 Laytime calculation
4.4.1 Normal (or ‘Non Reversible’) Laytime
4.4.2 Reversible laytime
4.4.3 Average laytime
4.4.1 Normal or Non-reversible Laytime
 If nothing is specifically mentioned in the contract and
where loading and discharging port laytime allowances
are separately assessed, it can be taken that laytime is
‘normal’ or ‘non-reversible’.
 Thus laytime for loading port(s) and for discharging
port(s) are assessed entirely separately and it is possible
even to calculate, claim, negotiate and settle the load
port(s) despatch/demurrage sums before even a vessel has
reached her discharge port(s). 
 4.4.2 Reversible laytime
 ‘REVERSIBLE LAYTIME’ shall mean an option given to
the charterer to add together the time allowed for loading and
discharging. Where the option is exercised the effect is the
same as a total time being specified to cover both operations.
  Where allowance for both the loading and discharging ports
are added and calculated together. Either the contract may
openly be on ‘reversible’ terms without actually stating so –
e.g. 7 days, ‘all purposes’ or ‘16 total days’ – or there may be
an express clause giving the Charterers the right or the
option to apply reversible conditions if they so wish – in
other words, if they calculate it to be in their favour to do so.
Thus any laytime saved from the loading ports can be carried
forward and added to laytime allowed at the port(s) of
discharge.
4.4.3 Average Laytime
 ‘TO AVERAGE LAYTIME’ shall mean that separate
calculations are to be made for loading and discharging
and that any time saved in one operation is to be set off
against any excess time used in the other.
 Arises where separate calculations are performed for the
loading and for the discharging ports, with the final
results for each being combined in order to assess what is
finally due
 E.g. 2 days demurrage at load port would be cancelled out
by 2 days despatch at discharge port, even though the
daily value of demurrage may be twice that of despatch.
Difference
  At first sight it may appear there is no difference
between the application of reversible and average
laytime. In fact, differences can arise and, with
the same basic facts, it is possible to reach three
different results by applying each of the above
alternatives.
 装卸时间计算实例
 某船于 6 月 5 日星期二 16 点抵达装货港，并于 16 点 40
分递交 N/R ， 6 月 6 日 8 点开始装货，直至 6 月 12 日 1
2 点装货完毕，其中 6 月 7 日零点至 4 点因下雨停工。
该船于 6 月 24 日星期四 16 点抵达卸货港，并于 16 点 4
0 分递交 N/R ， 6 月 25 日星期五 8 点开始卸货，至 6 月
26 日星期六 20 点卸货完毕。合同规定“可用装货时间
和卸货时间分别为 3WWDSHEXEIU ，滞期费费率每天 3
000 美元，速遣费费率为 1500 美元。下午递交 N/R ，次
日 8 点起算装卸时间”。请按装卸时间平均计算方法统
算滞期费或速谴费。（按滞期时间连续计算的方法和节
省全部工作时间的方法计算）。
 答案：
装货港：
 6 月 5 日星期二 16 ： 00 抵达
 6 月 5 日星期二 16 ： 40 NOR
 6 月 6 日星期三 08 ： 00 起算 —— 24 ： 00 =16 小时
 6 月 7 日星期四 00 ： 00 ------- 04 ： 00 下雨 =0 小时
 6 月 7 日星期四 04 ： 00 ------- 24 ： 00 =20 小时
 6 月 8 日星期五 00 ： 00 ------- 24 ： 00 =24 小时
 6 月 9 日星期六 00 ： 00 ------- 12 ： 00 =12 小时 装卸
时间届满
 6 月 9 日星期六 12 ： 00 ------- 24 ： 00 =12 小时 滞期
 6 月 10 日星期天 00 ： 00 ------ 24 ： 00 =24 小时 滞期
 6 月 11 日星期一 00 ： 00 ------ 24 ： 00 =24 小时 滞期
 6 月 12 日星期二 00 ： 00 ------ 12 ： 00 =12 小时 滞期
 装港滞期时间为 3 天
卸货港
 6 月 24 日星期四 16 点抵达卸货港，并于 16 点 40 分递交
N/R ，
 6 月 25 日星期五 8 点开始卸货 使用 16 小时
 6 月 26 日星期六 20 点卸货完毕 使用 20 小时
 6 月 26 日星期六 20 点至 24 点 4 小时
 6 月 27 日星期天 除外
 6 月 28 日星期一 0 点至 24 点 24 小时
 6 月 29 日星期二 0 点至 8 点 8 小时 装
卸时间届满
 卸港速遣时间为 1.5 天
 按平均计算 3 天— 1.5 天 =1.5 天滞期
 滞期费为 1.5 天 ×3000=4500USD