I should extrapolate a little further on my last posting. You see the term 'self trimming bulk carrier' is one of those terms that makes lawyers very rich but in reality does very little for the profession.
Infact there is no such vessel, recognised by class or any other official means, as a self trimming bulk carrier. This term has crept into the chartering venacular and really should only be used in association with the cargo it will carry. Any other cargo other than 'freeflowing grain cargoes' renders just about all dry bulk carriers 'non' self trimming. ie most bulk cargoes require extra trimming.
Anyway - here is my suggestion. All parties should just avoid using the term. What you are worried about at the end of the day is the 'time and cost' of extra trimming - so stick with thatt and agree a suitable clause.
Example - all time, cost, risk of extra trimming to be for owners (or charterers) account.
Cheers
VS
No comments:
Post a Comment