欢迎来海员网!没有海员的贡献世界上一半的人会受冻,另一半人会挨饿,关心海员,关爱海员,关注海员, 关注海员网www.ihaiyuan.com,属于中国海员自己的网站
海员网_海员之家_海员招聘网_船员网_船员之家_船员招聘网_中国海员网服务第一门户
政策问答
船员求职
船东招聘
证书查询
新闻综合
查询校企
关键字: 

时时彩游戏规则:《装卸时间与滞期费》第二章——装卸时间条款-连载(三十九)

发布者:云南时时彩开奖视频|更新时间:2018-07-03 09:50:31|咨询可以加微信/QQ号:652522234 | 32人评论)

云南时时彩开奖视频 www.0u6qp.cn 我要求职 我要招聘 职务晋升 办海员证 培训招生 知识更新

  《装卸时间与滞期费》第6版

  Laytime Clauses 装卸时间条款

  2.265当该案提交到上议院时,上议院认定:责任终止条款是有效的,不是承租人,而是由收货人安排并负责卸货同时承担由此引起的延迟责任。另外,卸货是因码头工人的罢工而拖延,但在该案中,船东负责的卸货部分仅仅就是平舱,这亦是船员能够而且乐意干的,同罢工无关。显然,码头公司仅是收货人的代理,而不是船东的代理。尽管如此,收货人却被免除了对延迟的责任,因为他们既不能找别人来完成任务也不能自己去做。

  2.266 In both cases referred to above, the strike was by the servants of a third party and the question therefore arises as to whether it would make a difference if the strike had been by the servants of the charterers or consignees as the case may be. It is submitted that the answer is ‘‘No’’, provided that it is shown that no alternative source of labour was available. However, in his speech in Hick v. Raymond & Reid, Lord Ashbourne does seem to suggest that a relevant factor might be whether ‘‘the happening of the strike was entirely beyond and outside the control of either’’ party.

  2.266在以上所提到的两个案例中,均是第三方雇员的罢工,由此就产生了一个问题是——如果是承租人或收货人的雇员罢工的话,其结果又会有什么不同呢?回答是:‘没有区别’,如果这证明是没有可以替代的劳动力资源的话。不过,在Hick诉Raymond Reid—案的报告中,Ashbourne勋爵似乎建议:有关的因素或许是‘所发生的罢工是否完全超出了双方当事人任何一方的控制范围’?

  2.267 If by this is simply meant that, in the event of a strike, alternative sources of labour must, if possible, be found, then no problem arises. However, if it was intended to suggest that the causes of a strike might be relevant, then considerable dif?culty might arise in deciding culpability or otherwise for the delay.

  2.267 简而言之,如果发生了罢工,可能的话,必须要找到可替代的劳动力资源,这样就不会产生什么争议了。然而,若试图提议罢工也是相关的原因的话,就会有相当大地困难去确定造成延迟的责任或原因。

  

  Actions of port and other authorities

  港方和其它当局的行为

  2.268 Where the actions or omissions of port and other authorities, whether de facto or de jure, delay or impede loading or discharge, the resultant loss suffered by the shipowner will not be recoverable from the charterers.

  2.268不论从事实上还是从法律上讲,如果由于港方及其他有关当局的行为或疏忽不作为而拖延或妨碍了装/卸作业的话,船东由此而遭受的损失后果是无法从承租人那里得到补偿的。

  2.269 Thus, in Ford and others v. Cotesworth and another, a vessel was discharging at Callao when news arrived of the approach of a Spanish ?eet. The local Customs authorities, apprehending a bombardment of the port, refused to allow any more goods to be discharged into the Custom House since they wished it to be cleared of goods already landed before the arrival of the Spanish ?eet. The vessel consequently lay part discharged for seven days, when she was ordered away to be out of the danger of bombardment, after which she returned and discharge was ?nally completed.

  2.269因此,在 Ford and others v. Cotesworth and another案中,正在秘鲁卡亚俄港卸货时船舶,传来消息说一艘西班牙舰队正在逼近。当地海关当局害怕港口遭到炮击,拒绝允许再往海关仓库继续卸货,因为他们希望在西班牙舰队抵达之前清理所有已经卸到岸上的货物。为了避开炮击的危险,该轮被指示载着剩余未卸的货物离开,经过7天之后,她才又返回并最终将货卸完。

  2.270 In these circumstances it was held at ?rst instance by the trial judge that there was no claim for the period whilst the vessel was away from Callao and by the full court that there could also be no recovery for the time whilst discharge was suspended by order of the Customs authorities.

  2.270鉴于这种情况,初审法院的法官判定:对于该轮离开卡亚俄港的这段期间不能得到赔偿,同时,上诉法院合议庭也认为,由于海关当局的指示而致使卸货中断的这段时间是得不到补偿的。

  

  2.271 Similarly, in Good & Co v. Isaacs, a ship was chartered to carry oranges to Hamburg, discharging at a usual fruit berth. When she arrived, the usual fruit berths were occupied and the fruit warehouses full. The warehouses and the cranes used for discharging were under the control of government of?cials, who did not give permission for the vessel to berth for ?ve days. The Court of Appeal rejected the shipowner’s claim for this delay. Kay LJ said:

  I think the true result of the evidence is that there was no delay except what was occasioned by the custom of the port, and for this the charterers are not responsible.

  2.271同样,在Good & Co v. Isaacs—案中,该轮出租运输柑橘到汉堡,并在通常的水果泊位卸货。当她抵达时,这些通常的水果泊位均被占着,而且,装水果的仓库也已经满了。这些仓库和卸货用的吊车均在政府官员的控制之下,他们过了 5天才批准该轮靠泊。上诉法院驳回了船东就这一延迟提起的索赔。Kay大法官说:

  我认为,证据的真正结果是,除了由于港口习惯所引起的事态外,不存在延迟问题,故承租人对此不必负责。

  2.272 In Weir & Co v. Richardson, it was held that the principles set out above applied even where the dock authority, the River Wear Commissioners, were negligent in discharging the ship.

  2.272 在Weir & Co v. Richardson—案中,法院还判定:上述原则甚至还适用于码头当局、河道管理委员会在卸货过程中疏忽大意的情况。

  

  《装卸时间与滞期费》购买链接(点击可购买)

  海运圈聚焦专栏作者 魏长庚船长(微信号CaptWei)


最新海员招聘
木匠 发布时间:2016-07-15 15:58:07
水手 发布时间:2016-07-15 15:56:32
木匠 发布时间:2014-06-04 09:54:37
大厨 发布时间:2014-06-04 09:53:16
白皮三副 发布时间:2014-06-04 09:52:19
最新海员简历
刘大管 发布时间:2018-07-05 09:35:45
吴船长 发布时间:2018-07-03 11:29:19
王二副 发布时间:2018-07-02 08:56:33
张亚贵 发布时间:2018-06-28 09:49:10
高进 发布时间:2018-06-27 09:13:48
会员中心 我要求职 我要招聘 职务晋升 办海员证 培训招生 知识更新 广告投放

海员网站长 点击这里与海员招聘网客服联系 652522234 | 合作请来信

版权归┊云南时时彩开奖视频 云南时时彩开奖视频 云南时时彩开奖视频 海员论坛 船东招聘 船务公司招聘 云南时时彩开奖视频网站所有。

海员网常年法律顾问:Iilw-庄毅雄律师 苏ICP备12072381号-1 海员网还提供船讯网船舶动态查询网站地图

云南时时彩开奖视频
  • 中国虚拟现实创新创业大赛南昌赛区颁奖仪式举行 2018-08-20
  • 江西发现湿唇兰带叶兰分布 2018-08-20
  • 续写“八八战略”新篇章 2018-08-19
  • 由进口至出口再至走向世界,这一路着实不易,其中少不了无数位科研人员的奉献与牺牲。 2018-08-19
  • 901| 714| 967| 127| 726| 520| 960| 763| 376| 868|