2,049
edits
Changes
From DMC
no edit summary
Of the remaining points raised by the parties, the judge further concluded that:
a) while the owners said that the port authority had accepted the vessel as arrived, even if that was the case, that was not a conclusion reached under the terms of the fixture recap;
b) the definition of "port" in the Laytime Definitions for Charterparties 2013/The Baltic Code 2014 cannot be taken to provide a definition of "port limits", save where the parties deliberately choose it as their definition (which they did not do in this case); c) having regard to the treatment of the subject matter by the authorities, the court was not at liberty to hold that “port limits” means “geographical” port limits, as shown by an Admiralty chart.
'''Comment'''
