精彩海运视频，极具深度的专栏文章和海量的市场分析报告，以及指数、油价和气象信息

　　《装卸时间与滞期费》第6版

　　Laytime Clauses 装卸时间条款

　　Rate per hook

　　每吊钩装卸率

　　2.173 The meaning of a laytime provision which provided for the laytime allowed to be calculated on the basis of ‘‘150 m.t. per Hook PWWD of 24 Consec. hrs. . . . ’’ has been considered in a London Arbitration.

　　2.173 允许装卸时间按照‘每连续24小时良好天气工作日每货钩150公吨……’来计算装卸时间的条款，其意义已在伦敦仲裁案中被认真探讨过。

　　2.174 The vessel concerned had three holds to which access was obtained by three hatches. The conﬁguration of the cargo compartments was such that a maximum of four gangs could work at the same time. The hatches were served by six derricks and two cranes. When loading a cargo such as bagged copra, the derricks would usually be coupled in union purchase with one ‘‘hook’’ operated by each pair of derricks. Given the availability of the cranes and limited by the maximum working space within the holds for the loading/discharging gangs, the vessel was properly to be regarded as a ‘‘four-hook ship’’.

　　2.174所涉及的船舶有三个货舱，并分别对应三个进出舱口，货舱空间的构造可以最大的供4个工班同时作业。这些舱口共有6个旋臂吊杆和两个克令吊。当装载诸如袋装干椰肉这样的货物时，通常一对旋臂吊杆作为一组‘并吊’进行作业，每一对吊杆由一个‘吊钩’操作。克令吊的可用性是一定的，但又受限于货舱内工班进行装/卸货活动的最大作业空间，所以该轮严格意义上讲应看作是‘4吊钩的船’。
　　

　　2.175 The owners argued that, as the vessel was a four-gang ship, the rate of cargo operations ought to be 600 tonnes per day. The charterers contended that the permitted period of laytime ought to be calculated by reference to the number of hooks actually used, which at the load ports was a maximum of two at any one time, whilst at the discharge ports three hooks were utilised.

　　2.175船东争辩说，既然该轮是4个工班的船，那么货物的作业率就应为每天600吨。承租人辩称说允许的装卸时间应参照实际使用的吊钩数来计算，即在装港有时最多用两个，而在卸港却使用3个。

　　2.176 The arbitrators held that describing a ship by reference to ‘‘hooks’’ gave a more accurate picture of the vessel’s cargo working capabilities than by reference merely to the number of hatches/holds. Physically, there might be any number of extra hooks available, by ship’s gear working singly or by shore cranes, but ‘‘hooks’’ in the sense used here went to the heart of the matter, namely how many gangs at maximum could be worked on board the ship. Given a description of a vessel by reference to its ‘‘hooks’’, a reliable estimate could be made of the vessel’s prospects of completing cargo work by a simple calculation, which took the vessel’s characteristics into account as well as local factors. Whereas some holds could only be worked by one gang, others were of sufﬁcient size and with adequate hatchway access to enable the efﬁcient use of two gangs simultaneously. Thus the expression a ‘‘four-hook’’ ship was the same as saying a ‘‘four-gang’’ ship, provided the vessel was to be worked with conventional loading gear whether on shore or on the ship. The arbitrators therefore held that the laytime allowed was to be based on loading/ discharging 600 tonnes per day. It did not relate to the maximum number of ‘‘hooks’’ that might be dangled over the hatches, even though some could not be serviced by a gang, and neither did it import the concept of being based on the number of hooks actually used as contended for by the charterers.
　　

　　2.176 仲裁员裁定：相比较仅仅参照舱口/货舱数，参照‘吊钩’描述船舶可以对货物工作能力给出更准确的情景说明。实质上，或许还有一些额外的可用吊钩，要么单独受船上的机械操控，要么受岸上的克令吊操控，但是，这里所指的“钩”的中心意思就是说，该轮最多能有多少个工班进行作业。以‘吊钩’来描述船舶，根据该船的特点及当地港口因素，通过简单地计算，可以对船舶完成货物作业预期做出比较可靠的估计。鉴于有些货舱仅能由一个工班作业，而有些货舱有足够的空间大小和适当的舱口通道能够同时安排两个工班作业，‘4吊钩’船的表示方法同样可以说成‘4个工班’的船，如果船舶可以使用通常起货装备进行作业的话，而不管是由岸上或船上的机械完成的。因此，仲裁员裁定：允许的装卸时间按每天装/卸600吨计算。这同舱口上所悬挂着的最多的“吊钩”的数量无关，即使其中一些并不能为工班所使用，也使得承租人基于实际所使用的吊钩数作为争辩这种想法无足轻重了。
　　