CHAPTER 3 第3章
Commencement of laytime
Port charters 港口租船合同
3.56 There are some ports, e.g. Hull, Glasgow and the Weser ports, where the usual waiting area is not within the port. In such cases, these deﬁnitions are therefore inaccurate.
3.57 The limits of a particular port may vary according to the purpose for which the limits are being deﬁned. Thus port limits may be deﬁned by law or by custom and the extent of the port may be different for administrative, ﬁscal, geographical and commercial purposes.
3.58 An early explanation of why ports must have limits was given by Lush J in Nicholson v. Williams, where he said:
Ports and havens are not merely geographical expressions; they are places appointed by the Crown ‘‘for persons and merchandises to pass into and out of the realm’’ and at such places only is it lawful for ships to load and discharge cargo. The assignment of such places to be ‘‘the inlets and gates’’ of the realm is, and always has been, a branch of the prerogative resting, as Blackstone remarks, partly upon a ﬁscal foundation in order to secure the King’s marine revenue. Their limits and bounds are necessarily deﬁned by the authority which creates them, and the area embraced within those limits constitutes the port.
3.58 在Nicholson v. Williams案，Lush法官最早解释了港口为什么必须要有界限的问题，说：
3.59 In Leonis Steamship Co v. Rank (No 1), Kennedy LJ observed:
The limits of a port established by law or ancient custom may be very wide, or again in the case of a newly established place of shipping trafﬁc the limits may be uncertain because not yet deﬁned by any competent authority for any purpose... Just as a port may have one set of limits, if viewed geographically, and another set of limits for ﬁscal or pilotage purposes, so when it is named in a commercial document, and for commercial purposes, the term is to be construed in a commercial sense in relation to the objects of the particular commercial transaction.
3.59 在Leonis Steamship Co v. Rank (No 1)案中，Kennedy大法官评述说：
3.60 As it was put by Brett MR in the Sailing Ship Garston Co v. Hickie:
The word ‘‘port’’ in a charterparty does not necessarily mean an Act of Parliament pilotage port, or, which is the better word, ‘‘pilotage district’’. Therefore, when you are trying to deﬁne the port with regard to which persons who enter into a charterparty are contracting, you endeavour to ﬁnd words which will shut out those things which you know they do not intend.
3.60 这正如上诉法院院长Brett法官在 Sailing Ship Garston Co v. Hickie案中所指出的那样：
3.61 Later in his judgment, having said: ‘‘There will never be a port, in the ordinary business sense of the word, unless there is some element of safety in it for the ship and goods’’, he went on to say:
Now sometimes you have only a place of comparative safety, a place in which neither the natural conﬁguration of the land with regard to the sea, nor the artiﬁcial walls make a perfectly safe port, but only a place of comparative safety. Then you have not such easy means of ascertaining what the parties to a charterparty must have meant by ‘‘the port’’, and you must ﬁnd out where, in fact, people have had their ships loaded and unloaded. The moment you can ﬁnd that the loading and unloading of ships takes place at a particular spot, you may safely infer that the parties understood that spot to be within ‘‘the port’’, because as a general rule people do not load or unload goods outside the port... But the port may extend beyond the place of loading and unloading... Then, if you want to ﬁnd out how far the port extends beyond the place of loading and unloading, what is the next test you would apply? If you ﬁnd that the authorities, who are known in commercial business language as ‘‘the port authorities’’, are exercising authority over ships within a certain space of water, and that the shipowners and shippers who have ships within that space of water are submitting to the jurisdiction which is claimed by those authorities, whether legally or not, whether according to Act of Parliament or not, if you ﬁnd what are called ‘‘the port authorities’’ exercising port discipline, and the ships which frequent that water submitting to the port discipline so exercised, that seems to be the strongest possible evidence that the shipowners, the shippers and the port authorities... have all come to the conclusion to accept that space of water in which the authority is so exercised as ‘‘the port’’ of the place.