용선료의 지급연체 효과에 대한 영국법원의 입장에 대한 고찰 - Spar Shipping 사건판결을 중심으로 -

Abstract

The prime focus of the judgment between Spar Shipping and The Astra was on the issue of whether the timely payment of hire under the charterparties was a condition or innominate term. The difference between these terms affect the entitlement of the shipowner to claim damages for loss of bargain for the remaining period of the charters when withdrawing the ships from the chartered service. The shipowner may claim outstanding hire and expectation losses for the unexpired charter term if the hire payment term is regarded as a ‘condition’ or if it is an innominate term and the breach was of sufficient severity, i.e. the shipowner had established that the behaviour of the charterer amounted to either actual repudiation or renunciation. If the hire payment term is not a ‘condition’ and the breach was trivial (for example, the charterer was only a few minutes late in payment), the shipowner’s claim is limited to outstanding hire. Regarding the interpretation of these terms, there was a conflict between promoting certainty and avoiding a draconian sanctions to the charterer in terms of uncommercial result if a slight delay of payment of hire would give rise to a right to terminate and a right to damages and loss of bargain, even though anti-technicality clause is devised to relieve this draconian result to a certain extent. Recently (7 October 2016), the Court of Appeal settled the position of this conflicted issue and we will analyse and comment on this precedent and its significant meaning.