Hubbry Logo
LaytimeLaytimeMain
Open search
Laytime
Community hub
Laytime
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Laytime
Laytime
Laytime
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In commercial shipping, laytime is the amount of time allowed, measured in days (or portions thereof), hours, or even tides, within a voyage charter for the loading and unloading of cargo.[1][2]

Under a voyage charter or time charter, the shipowner is responsible for operating the vessel, and the master and crew are the employees of the shipowner, not the charterer. However, once the vessel has "arrived" at a port the charterer then assumes responsibility for the loading and unloading of cargo and has a period of laytime in which to carry that out. The actual loading may be performed by a third-party stevedore.

The moment that laytime commences is determined by a Notice of Readiness (or "NOR"), which the master or agent of the ship must give to the port when the ship has arrived at the port of loading or discharge. The charterparty contract determines the precise meaning of "arrival". Usually, "arrival" is when the ship has arrived at the port and is ready in all respects to load or discharge; but it may be, say, when the ship has passed buoy #2 in the approach channel, or once the vessel has pass through lock gates.[3]

If the charterer does not comply with the NOR, the carrier may cancel the contract and seek damages.[4] If the charterer's delay means that laytime is exceeded, a predetermined penalty (i.e. liquidated damages) called "demurrage" is incurred.[5][6] If the whole period of laytime is not needed, a refund called "despatch" may be payable by the shipowner to the charterer. Despatch is normally paid at 50% of the demurrage rate, but that depends on the terms of the charterparty. The ship may thus be able to leave port early. Despatch does not normally apply to tanker charters.[citation needed]

Case law

[edit]

The legal case of Flacker Shipping Ltd. v Glencore Grain Ltd. (the Happy Day) raised a question regarding the need for a valid NOR to be issued where an earlier NOR was submitted but not valid. Potter LJ, supported by Lady Justice Arden and Sir Denis Henry, ruled that

Laytime can commence under a voyage charterparty requiring service of a notice of readiness when no valid notice of readiness has been served in circumstances where (a) a notice of readiness valid in form is served upon the charterers or receivers as required under the charterparty prior to the arrival of the vessel; (b) the vessel thereafter arrives and is, or is accepted to be, ready to discharge to the knowledge of the charterers; (c) discharge thereafter commences to the order of the charterers or receivers without either having given any intimation of rejection or reservation in respect of the notice of readiness previously served or any indication that further notice of readiness is required before laytime commences.[7]

Another case in 2011, Suek AG v Glencore International AG (The "Hang Ta"),[8] addressed a difference of interpretation between the parties to the contract as to giving of a NOR at "a usual waiting place" instead of at the intended discharge berth. The intended berth was occupied, and also access was affected by inclement weather conditions, so there were two contending reasons for the delayed berthing. Glencore argued that the NOR was given too early and was therefore invalid, because the berth's occupation by another vessel was not the sole reason operating to affect berthing, but the court rejected their argument and supported SUEK.[9]

Lay days

[edit]

"Laytime" should not be confused with "Lay days". The latter refers to the period within which the shipowner should make the vessel "ready" to the Charterer at the place and time agreed in the charter party. "Cancelling Date" is the last day of "Lay days" and acts as a deadline to tender "Notice of Readiness". A ship (vessel) failing to become an "Arrived Ship" by tendering a valid Notice of Readiness bears the risk of being refused/cancelled by Charterers as per Charter-Party provisions.

References

[edit]
[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Laytime

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Laytime refers to the specific period of time agreed upon in a voyage party during which the charterer may load and discharge onto or from the vessel without liability for additional payments beyond the agreed . In maritime law, laytime provisions are fundamental to voyage charterparties, which govern the carriage of goods by sea under time-based agreements between shipowners and charterers. These provisions allocate responsibility for delays during loading and discharging operations at ports or berths, ensuring the vessel is made available for work after a valid Notice of Readiness (NOR) is tendered by the owner, confirming the ship is physically and legally ready at the designated location. Laytime typically commences upon acceptance of the NOR, subject to conditions such as the vessel being "reachable on arrival" (meaning a berth is available without delay) or "always accessible" (ensuring safe navigation to and from the berth). The duration of laytime is negotiated and specified in the charter party, often expressed in fixed days, hours, or as a rate per ton of , with common modifiers including running days (continuous 24-hour periods), weather working days (excluding time lost to adverse weather that prevents operations), and exclusions for Sundays, holidays, or strikes (SHEX or similar clauses). If laytime is exceeded due to charterer delays, accrues as at a predetermined rate, compensating the owner for the vessel's detention and running continuously thereafter, even during excepted periods unless otherwise stipulated. Conversely, if operations complete ahead of schedule, the charterer may earn despatch money, typically at half the rate, as an incentive for efficiency. To promote uniformity and reduce disputes, organizations like BIMCO have developed standardized Laytime Definitions for Charter Parties (first in 1980, revised in 2013), which provide precise meanings for key terms such as "," "berth," "working day," and "" when expressly incorporated into contracts. These definitions apply to both loading and discharging unless specified otherwise and extend to contracts of affreightment evidenced by bills of lading. Laytime calculations often involve prorating partial days and accounting for interruptions, with legal principles under (commonly governing such contracts) emphasizing the owner's duty to mitigate delays and the charterer's obligation to provide necessary facilities. Disputes frequently arise over NOR validity, exception applicability, or time-bar clauses limiting claim periods, underscoring the need for precise documentation and prompt action in maritime operations.

Fundamentals

Definition

Laytime refers to the contractual period stipulated in a voyage during which the charterer may load or discharge without liability for additional payments to the beyond the agreed . This allowance ensures that the vessel is made available for operations at the loading and discharging ports, balancing the interests of both parties in efficient cargo handling. In charter parties, laytime for loading and discharging is typically specified either separately—for instance, with distinct time periods or rates for each operation—or as a combined total, depending on the negotiated terms. The period commences upon the valid tendering of a Notice of Readiness (NOR), a written declaration by the master or confirming that the vessel has arrived at or is ready to proceed to the agreed location and is fully prepared in every respect to perform the operations. For NOR to be effective, the vessel must meet both physical and legal readiness requirements, such as being free of contaminants and having complied with port regulations. The total laytime allowance is commonly determined by the formula: total laytime = ( quantity / loading rate) + ( quantity / discharging rate), with rates expressed in units such as tons per day or per hour as agreed in the charter party. A standard unit for laytime is the working day (WWD), defined as a consecutive 24-hour period or part thereof, excluding Sundays and holidays (unless used for work), during which conditions allow operations to proceed normally without interruption. Exceeding laytime results in liability for the charterer. Laytime is often used interchangeably with the term lay days.

Historical Development

The concept of laytime emerged in 19th-century English maritime law as courts sought to define the time allowed for loading and discharging under voyage charters, transitioning from vague notions of "reasonable time" to fixed periods. A seminal development occurred in the decision in Postlethwaite v Freeland (1880), where the charterers' obligation to load within a specified laytime was interpreted as an absolute and unconditional engagement, independent of external delays unless excused by custom or contract. This case established foundational principles for laytime as a contractual allowance, rooted in to balance shipowners' and charterers' interests amid growing industrial trade. Early 20th-century standardization advanced through charter party forms, notably the GENCON (General Conditions) introduced by the (BIMCO) in 1922, which incorporated explicit laytime clauses for loading and discharging to mitigate disputes in international shipping. These forms reflected the shift from port-specific customs to more uniform terms, influenced by expanding global commerce that demanded predictable operations. Post-World War II, the surge in volumes—fueled by reconstruction and —drove further evolution from ambiguous "customary" allowances, often tied to local practices, to precise contractual specifications in charter parties. This period saw key judicial refinements, such as in The Johanna Oldendorff AC 479, where the clarified the "arrived ship" doctrine, requiring the vessel to be within the commercial area of the port for laytime to commence, thereby establishing enduring modern principles. Standardization efforts culminated in the development of dedicated clauses, exemplified by the Laytime Definitions for Charter Parties 2013, jointly issued by BIMCO and the Forum for Operational Issues of National Associations of Ship Brokers and Agents (FONASBA) and adopted in May 2013. These definitions addressed persistent ambiguities in terms like "working day of 24 consecutive hours" and "weather working day," providing clear interpretations to reduce litigation in voyage charters. Meanwhile, 20th-century milestones included the indirect influence of the Hague-Visby Rules (1968 amendments to the 1924 ), which standardized carrier liabilities for cargo damage under bills of lading and promoted efficient port operations, though they did not directly govern laytime in charter parties. This legal framework supported the broader post-war push toward contractual precision in maritime trade.

Calculation and Types

Methods of Calculation

The calculation of laytime in a voyage charter party begins with the vessel's arrival at the designated port or customary waiting area, where the master or agent tenders a Notice of Readiness (NOR) to the charterer or their representative, confirming the vessel's readiness to load or discharge . Laytime typically commences upon the tendering of a valid NOR, often 24 hours after tendering unless the charter party specifies otherwise, such as immediate start or a different notice period. This procedural step ensures both parties agree on the vessel's position and condition before time counting begins, with the NOR required in writing and served during office hours as per standard clauses. Once laytime starts, the duration allowed is determined based on the quantity and the stipulated loading or discharging rates outlined in the charter party, often expressed as tons per day or per hatch. For instance, if a charter party permits 5,000 tons per day for a 50,000-ton , the total laytime is calculated as 10 days by dividing the total quantity by the daily rate. The laytime used is then measured as the actual time elapsed from the commencement until the completion of cargo operations, recorded in running days or calendar days as agreed, without adjustments for interruptions in this baseline assessment. Fractions of days are handled on a basis to ensure precision; for example, if laytime is set at 5 days but operations require 5.5 days, the excess of 0.5 days is calculated proportionally, treating partial periods as equivalent fractions of a full day. This method applies uniformly to both loading and discharging phases, allowing for accurate determination of any overrun that may lead to . A critical tool in the calculation process is the Statement of Facts (SOF), a contemporaneous document prepared by the port agent and signed by representatives of the vessel, charterer, and stevedores, detailing the times of arrival, NOR tendering, commencement, and completion of operations, along with any relevant events. The SOF serves as the primary evidentiary record for verifying time used, facilitating by providing a neutral, agreed-upon timeline that supports subsequent laytime computations. For voyages involving multiple loading or discharging ports, laytime is often allocated on a total basis for the entire operation rather than per , unless the charter party specifies otherwise, requiring aggregation of time across ports to assess overall compliance. In such cases, reversible laytime may be applied, permitting the charterer to combine loading and discharging allowances across ports for efficiency, but calculations remain focused on the net time from NOR to completion at each stage.

Types of Laytime

Laytime in voyage parties can be structured in various ways to accommodate different operational needs, such as variability, conditions, or multi- voyages. These types define how time is counted toward the allowable period for loading and discharging , influencing allocation between shipowners and charterers. Common variants include running days, working days, all time on , reversible laytime, and average laytime, each tailored to specific scenarios like predictable bulk operations or complex itineraries. Running days, also known as consecutive days, count continuously from the commencement of laytime, including weekends, holidays, and regardless of working hours or weather conditions. This type is typically used in charter parties for operations in ports with stable conditions or where charterers seek predictability to avoid disputes over interruptions. It simplifies calculations by treating every 24-hour period as a full running day, making it suitable for liquid cargoes or facilities with 24/7 capabilities. Weather working days (WWD) exclude time lost due to adverse that prevents safe operations, providing a more equitable allowance in regions prone to , , or storms. Under this structure, laytime runs only on working days—or parts thereof—when permits work, with exclusions calculated based on the actual duration of interruptions relative to workable periods in a 24-hour span. WWD is commonly applied in open-port bulk dry trades, such as or , to account for natural delays without penalizing either party unduly. All time on demurrage (ATOD) applies once the laytime allowance is exhausted and begins, whereby all subsequent time counts fully toward the compensation period without the exceptions that may apply during laytime, such as or holidays. This ensures continuous liability for delays after the free period ends, compensating shipowners for vessel detention in a straightforward manner. It is standard in most charter parties to promote efficiency, though specific clauses may modify it. Reversible laytime treats the total allowable time for loading and discharging as a single, combined period that can be allocated flexibly between ports, allowing unused time from one operation to offset excesses in the other. This structure benefits charterers in voyages with variable port efficiencies, such as when loading completes early, by reversing the balance to extend discharging time. It is often specified in charter parties for bulk carriers on round voyages, reducing the risk of from imbalances. Average laytime permits separate computations of laytime for loading and discharging operations, with any time saved in one (potentially earning despatch) offset against overruns in the other to determine the net balance. This averaging mechanism is useful for multi-parcel or multi-port charters, balancing excesses and savings across legs to avoid cumulative penalties. It applies particularly in complex trades like mineral ores, where port-specific factors vary.

Demurrage

Demurrage serves as payable by the charterer to the when the vessel is detained beyond the agreed laytime for loading or discharging , compensating for the loss of earning potential during the delay. This penalty is explicitly stipulated in the charter party agreement, typically at a fixed daily rate, such as $20,000 per day or pro rata for partial days, to incentivize efficient operations and cover the owner's opportunity costs. The calculation of liability is straightforward: it equals the duration by which the actual time used exceeds the permitted laytime, multiplied by the agreed rate, with accrual beginning immediately upon the expiry of laytime. There is no transitional period between laytime and demurrage; instead, the established principle of "once on demurrage, always on demurrage" governs, ensuring continuous for the charterer without interruption from laytime exceptions—such as weather delays or holidays—unless the charter party expressly provides otherwise or the delay results from the owner's fault. This seamless shift underscores demurrage's role as a strict remedy for breach, distinct from the more flexible laytime allowances influenced by factors like reversible or working day types. Enforcement of demurrage claims relies on contractual mechanisms, including the shipowner's on the to secure payment for unpaid amounts, which is enforceable under through express party clauses granting possessory rights over the goods until settlement. In the United States, similar protection arises under the Commercial Instruments and Maritime Liens Act (46 U.S.C. § 31342), which recognizes maritime liens for claims stemming from party breaches, allowing the owner to the in rem if necessary. To mitigate excessive exposure, some parties incorporate caps or offsets, such as limiting to a maximum period (e.g., a fixed number of days beyond laytime) or reducing the rate after a threshold, providing a negotiated ceiling on liability. Despatch operates as the counterpart for completing operations ahead of laytime.

Despatch

Despatch serves as an payment from the to the charterer when loading or discharging operations are completed faster than the agreed laytime allowance, rewarding efficiency in operations. Typically calculated at half the rate—such as $10,000 per day if the rate is $20,000 per day—despatch motivates the charterer to minimize delays while balancing the 's interests. This reward is distinct from , which penalizes overruns, and is rooted in equitable principles of maritime law that promote operational efficiency without constituting for breach. The amount of despatch money is determined by multiplying the laytime saved by the agreed despatch rate, with payment due upon completion of operations and final of accounts. Laytime saved is assessed by comparing the actual time used against the total allowable laytime, often referencing the rate as a benchmark for setting the despatch rate. In practice, the rate and applicability are stipulated in the , ensuring the calculation aligns with the vessel's performance at load and discharge ports. The despatch rate is typically half the rate, though it can be agreed to be full or otherwise; separately, despatch may be calculated on all time saved (including excepted periods, sometimes termed despatch on all time saved) or only on working/laytime saved, as per standard provisions like BIMCO's Laytime Definitions. Half despatch, referring to the rate, is standard in many dry cargo fixtures to encourage prompt handling without over-incentivizing speed at the expense of safety. Claims for despatch are processed through the Statement of Facts (SOF), a contemporaneous record signed by the master and relevant parties documenting arrival, readiness, and operation times, combined with a laytime statement that quantifies saved time for payment. In reversible laytime scenarios, where total laytime applies across both loading and discharging ports, the charterer is entitled to despatch on the net time saved (total laytime minus total time used) to account for the combined operations. This process ensures transparency and verifiability, with disputes resolved under the governing charterparty terms.

Exceptions and Interruptions

Interruptions to Laytime

Interruptions to laytime refer to specific periods excluded from the counting of laytime under the terms of the , typically arising from events inherent to the vessel or attributable to the that prevent the continuation of loading or discharging operations. These interruptions are defined by the wording of the laytime itself, distinguishing them from broader exceptions that may require a causal link to handling. For instance, time lost due to the vessel's unseaworthiness, such as delays from inadequate or , does not count as laytime. Common causes of interruptions include faults on the part of the , such as defective on the vessel or by owner-provided stevedores, which halt operations without the charterer needing to prove amounting to a . These owner-attributable delays ensure that laytime only measures time productively available for charterer-directed work. Weather-related interruptions, such as those under "weather working days" or "weather permitting" provisions, exclude time when adverse conditions like , , or storms actually prevent safe or practical operations (e.g., halting handling of moisture-sensitive ). Light weather not impeding work does not qualify. These are definitional exclusions within the laytime calculation. In calculating laytime used, interrupted periods are deducted from the total time elapsed between the commencement and completion of operations, effectively extending the allowable laytime. For example, if actual time on totals five days but includes two days of interruption due to owner fault, only three days count toward exhausting laytime. This deduction prevents the charterer from being penalized for delays beyond their control. Ambiguities in laytime interruption clauses are interpreted under the rule, which construes unclear terms against the drafter—typically the in standard forms—to favor the charterer. This principle ensures that exclusions benefiting the owner are not extended beyond their explicit wording. A specific illustrating interruptions occurs when there is a breakdown of the ship's gear, such as cranes or pumps, during loading or discharging operations due to the owner's to maintain equipment properly; laytime ceases to run until the fault is remedied, as the vessel's readiness is compromised. In such cases, the charterer must still demonstrate that the breakdown directly impeded cargo work, but owner responsibility for the gear shifts the burden accordingly.

Exceptions Clauses

Exceptions clauses in voyage charter parties, such as the widely used GENCON form, provide specific contractual mechanisms to suspend the running of laytime during periods affected by unforeseen external events that hinder loading or discharging operations. These clauses aim to allocate risk fairly between owners and charterers by excluding time lost to factors beyond the charterer's control, thereby preventing the accrual of liability unless the clause extends to demurrage. Unlike definitional interruptions to laytime, which arise from the inherent terms of the laytime calculation, exceptions clauses explicitly override the continuous running of laytime once it has commenced. Note that BIMCO's GENCON 2022 (released November 2022) updates these provisions, incorporating the 2013 Laytime Definitions for greater uniformity and clarifying that laytime runs continuously unless prevented by specified exceptions; prior forms like GENCON 1994 remain in use but may require riders for modern needs. In the GENCON 2022 charter party (updating GENCON 1994), standard exceptions include provisions for , lock-outs, and customs delays, each designed to pause laytime counting until the impediment resolves. For instance, the updated strike clause addresses labor disruptions, requiring charterers to mitigate and notify owners, with laytime suspended if the strike prevents operations and was not charterer-instigated. These exceptions apply only to the extent that the event directly prevents cargo operations, requiring precise contractual wording to minimize interpretive disputes. Strikes and lock-outs trigger suspension under dedicated clauses like GENCON's General Strike Clause (revised in 2022), which halts laytime if a labor action prevents cargo handling and was not instigated by the charterer. The exception endures until the strike concludes or an alternative arrangement (such as rerouting to another port) is implemented, with the charterer required to notify owners promptly and mitigate delays. Proof of the strike's impact is essential, typically through union declarations or port logs, and the clause may limit liability during waiting periods if discharge is affected. Other common exceptions encompass war risks, , and time, each necessitating careful drafting to ensure suspension without ambiguity. War risks exceptions allow laytime pause during delays from hostilities, blockades, or that render ports unsafe, often permitting owners to deviate routes without penalty. exceptions suspend time for official health restrictions on the vessel or , provided they stem from external factors like outbreaks rather than vessel faults. time is excepted if it directly conflicts with cargo operations and is not attributable to owner delays, though some forms allocate a fixed period outside laytime altogether. These provisions underscore the need for explicit language, as courts interpret them against the drafter in disputes. The burden of proof for invoking an exceptions clause rests on the party seeking to suspend laytime—typically the charterer— who must demonstrate that the event occurred, directly caused the delay, and falls within the clause's scope. Evidence often includes contemporaneous like statements of fact (SOF), weather logs, affidavits from port authorities, or strike notices, with tribunals scrutinizing claims strictly to prevent abuse. Failure to provide sufficient proof results in continuous laytime counting, highlighting the importance of detailed documentation during operations.

Governing Principles

Laytime in international maritime law is primarily governed by the terms of voyage charter parties, which form the contractual basis for allocating time allowances for loading and discharging . English serves as the default legal framework for interpreting these contracts, particularly in disputes arising under standard forms used globally, establishing principles such as the charterer's liability for detaining the vessel beyond agreed laytime. While the Convention on the (UNCLOS) provides a broader international framework influencing maritime navigation and port access, laytime provisions remain predominantly contractual and are not directly regulated by UNCLOS. Laytime clauses are subject to the principle of strict construction under English , meaning they are interpreted literally according to their express wording, with no implied terms unless absolutely necessary to give business efficacy to the . This approach ensures predictability in commercial dealings but requires precise drafting to avoid ambiguities that could lead to disputes over time counting or exclusions. To promote uniformity in laytime interpretation across international parties, the (BIMCO) developed the Voyage Charter Party Laytime Interpretation Rules 1993 (VOYLAYRULES 93), a widely adopted standard that defines key terms like "laytime" and standardizes provisions for global application. These rules, issued jointly with organizations such as the Comité Maritime International (CMI) and the Federation of National Associations of Ship Brokers and Agents (FONASBA), help mitigate variations in national practices and facilitate consistent enforcement in cross-border trade. The rules were revised in 2013 as the Laytime Definitions for Charter Parties, providing updated meanings for terms such as "," "berth," "working day," and incorporating modern practices. Jurisdictional aspects of laytime disputes often involve arbitration in established centers like London or New York, as specified in choice of law clauses within charter parties, which are critical for determining the applicable legal regime and avoiding conflicts. Laytime obligations in charter parties are explicitly excluded from the Hague-Visby Rules, which apply only to bills of lading issued under such charters rather than the charter party itself.

Key Case Law

In the landmark case of Oldendorff (E.L.) & Co GmbH v Tradax Export SA (The Johanna Oldendorff) 2 Lloyd's Rep 285, the established the key test for determining when a vessel is considered "arrived" under a port charterparty, thereby allowing laytime to commence upon tender of a valid notice of readiness (NOR). The court ruled that a vessel arrives when it has reached a position within the where it is at the immediate and effective disposition of the charterer, typically a usual waiting place if the berth is unavailable due to congestion or other reasons. This decision introduced the concept of "reachable time," permitting NOR to be tendered if the vessel is en route to the berth but within the commercial boundaries of the , provided it is ready in all respects to load or discharge cargo. Building on this, Nereide SpA di Navigazione v Bulk Oil International Ltd (The Laura Prima) 1 Lloyd's Rep 1 further clarified the validity of NOR in berth charterparties where the nominated berth is unavailable upon arrival. The held that laytime begins at the anchorage or waiting area if the vessel tenders NOR there, even if the berth is not immediately reachable due to port congestion, navigational hazards, or other factors beyond the parties' control. The ruling emphasized that the phrase "whether in berth or not" in standard forms like Exxonvoy allows laytime to start from the time specified after NOR, without requiring physical berthing, as long as the vessel is ready and the expected delay is not attributable to the owner's fault. This interpretation has been widely adopted to prevent disputes over arrival status in congested ports.

References

  1. https://www.bimco.org/media/qy2neqim/laytime-definitions-for-charter-parties-2013-v2.pdf
  2. https://www.shipownersclub.com/latest-updates/publications/laytime-and-demurrage/
  3. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/c4isl55_en.pdf
  4. https://www.skuld.com/topics/legal/pi-and-defence/customary-quick-despatch---every-second-counts/
  5. https://www.bimco.org/contractual-affairs/bimco-contracts/contracts/gencon-2022/
  6. https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2797&context=all_dissertations
  7. https://lawexplores.com/1-general-principles/
  8. https://www.bimco.org/contractual-affairs/bimco-contracts/contracts/laytime-definitions-for-charter-parties-2013/
  9. https://www.trans-lex.org/945100/_/laytime-demurrage-detention-and-despatch-in-sea-transport/
  10. https://journals.gen.tr/index.php/joa/article/view/481
  11. https://www.fonasba.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/VOYLAYRULES-2013.pdf
  12. https://www.skuld.com/topics/legal/pi-and-defence/laytime-wwd-weather-working-days/
  13. https://www.steamshipmutual.com/publications/articles/agiosdimitrios1104
  14. https://www.handybulk.com/reversible-laytime/
  15. https://www.handybulk.com/averaged-laytime/
  16. https://fortiorlaw.com/news/laytime-and-demurrage/
  17. https://gard.no/insights/demurrage-lien-and-cesser-clauses/
  18. https://srinath-keshavan-naj7.squarespace.com/s/SBL_Demurrage-and-Detention-2014.pdf
  19. https://www.virtuemarine.nl/post/demurrage-laytime-and-despatch-key-terms-explained
  20. https://www.bimco.org/contracts-and-clauses/bimco-clauses/laytime-definitions-for-charter-parties-2013
  21. https://www.bbc-chartering.com/terms/[glossary](/page/Glossary)
  22. https://www.marinepublic.com/blogs/charter/511224-laytime-allowable-non-reversible-reversible-explained
  23. https://www.westpandi.com/news-and-resources/news/guides/defence-guides/defence-guide-interruptions-and-exceptions-to-layt/
  24. https://www.steamshipmutual.com/publications/articles/exception-to-laytime-19122013
  25. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contra_proferentem
  26. https://www.assagenti.it/Public/doc/4.%20GENCON%201994.pdf
  27. https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff73d60d03e7f57eaa388
  28. https://www.mills-co.com/news-and-insights/time-bars-quick-reference-guide
  29. https://www.trans-lex.org/702000/
  30. https://www.bimco.org/contractual-affairs/bimco-clauses/current-clauses/law-and-arbitration-clause-2020-london
  31. http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/legislation/haguevisbyrules.htm
  32. https://www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=147196
  33. https://www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=148086
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.