Is any amendment to the current time charter forms needed? -Focusing on the unsettled issues of redelivery under the English law and standard terms of a time charter-
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Ship owners and time charterers can both suffer unexpected commercial disadvantage if a ship is redelivered to her owners either before or after the agreed time charter duration. However, in the consideration of the situation that most contemporary time charters are based on various standard forms in the market, it should be examined whether or not any amendment to current redelivery clauses is required by confirming whether or not there are still the unsettled or arguable issues of redelivery under current clauses. In addition to this, in the consideration of the fact that the legal principles of a time charter under the English law in the Korean courts has been reviewed in detail through the Rehabilitation proceedings of the Korean shipping companies, it is practically meaningful to discuss the legal issues of redelivery under English law. Accordingly, this article will examine whether or not there is a necessity of any amendment to current redelivery clauses by analyzing generally the legal principles of redelivery under English law.
Abstract
Ship owners and time charterers can both suffer unexpected commercial disadvantage if a ship is redelivered to her owners either before or after the agreed time charter duration. However, in the consideration of the situation that most contemporary time charters are based on various standard forms in the market, it should be examined whether or not any amendment to current redelivery clauses is required by confirming whether or not there are still the unsettled or arguable issues of redelivery under current clauses. In addition to this, in the consideration of the fact that the legal principles of a time charter under the English law in the Korean courts has been reviewed in detail through the Rehabilitation proceedings of the Korean shipping companies, it is practically meaningful to discuss the legal issues of redelivery under English law. Accordingly, this article will examine whether or not there is a necessity of any amendment to current redelivery clauses by analyzing generally the legal principles of redelivery under English law.
참고문헌 (67)
- Baughen S, "Shipping Law" (2012), Routledge
- Cartwright J, "Contract Law：An Introduction to the English law of Contract for the Civil Lawyer" (2013), Hart Publishing Ltd
- Coghlin T, "Time Charters" (2014), Informa Law from Routledge
- Furmston M, Cheshire, "Fifoot & Furmston’s Law of Contract" (2012), OUP
- Grant Hunter, "Legal Issues Relating to Time Charterparties" (2008), Inform
- Wilson J, "Carriage of Goods by Sea" (2012), Pearson Education Limited
- Foxton D, "Damage for late or early redelivery under time charterparties", L.M.C.L.Q, 461 (2008)
- K. V. Krishnaprasad, "From the mill shaft to the coal cruiser：contractual damages after the Achilleas", I.C.C.L.R, 218 (2011)
- Martin R, "shipping：charters’ orders", I.C.C.L.R, C38 (1995)
- Nicoll C, "The “available market” rule and period charters：Golden Strait Coporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishika Kaish", J.B.L, 91 (2008)
- O’sullivan J, "Damage for lost profits for late redelivery:how remote is to remote?", C.L.J, 34 (2009)
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 555, , 2007
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 645, , 1983
- EWHC 1077(Comm), , 2012
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 422, , 1975
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 77, , 1991
- EWHC 1617 (QB), , 2002
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 149, , 1976
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 115 (C.A.), , 1975
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 693, , 2003
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 75, , 1980
- UKHL 12, , 2007
- EWHC 1729(Comm), , 2006
- 1 WLR 1465, , 1994
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 533, , 1994
- "Hadley v Baxendale(1894) 9 Ex 341", ~ (1894)
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, , 1977
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 391, , 1990
- EWCA Civ 116, , 2004
- 2 K.B. 305, , 1919
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 404, , 1997
- "Limerick v Stott(1921) 7 LILR 69", ~ (1921)
- AC 1, , 1971
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 368, , 1977
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 24, , 1983
- "Meyer v Sanderson (1916) 32 T.L.R. 428", ~ (1916)
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 230, , 2014
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 357, , 1978
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 681, , 2002
- EWCA Civ 855, , 2009
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 175, , 1981
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 100, CA, , 1991
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 250, , 1976
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 267, , 1981
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 314, , 1997
- "Robinson v Harman(1848) 1 Exch 850", ~ (1848)
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 161, , 1994
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 225, , 1996
- 2 K.B. 11 (C.A.), , 1920
- UKSC 63, , 2012
- AC 191, , 1997
- "Watson Steamship v Merryweather (1913) 18 Com. Cas. 294", ~ (1913)
- 1 Lloyd’s Rep 521, , 1981
- 1 A.C. 301 (P.C.), , 1911
- A.C. 413 (H.L.), , 1962
- 2 Lloyd’s Rep 115, , 1992
- 1 KB 617, , 1922
- EWHC 739(Comm), , 2009
- "New York Produce Exchange", ~ (1946)
- "TIME CHARTER(New York Produce Exchange Form) Code Name：NYPE 93", ~
- "BIMCO UNIFORM TIME-CHARTER(AS REVISED 2001)CODE NAME：BALTIME 1939", ~
- "The Baltic and International Maritime Councial(BIMCO) General Time Charter Party Code Name：Gentime", ~
- "Code word for this Charter Party SHELLTIME 3", ~
- "Code word for this Charter Party SHELLTIME 4", ~
- "Exxon Mobil Time 2005 form", ~
- "Redelivery under time charters" (2001)[URL]
- "Explanatory Notes on Clauses" (1993)[URL]