Ship Fuel Consumption and Speed Claims in Time Charterparties

Ship Fuel Consumption

Ship Fuel Consumption is one of the most important commercial and legal issues in time chartering because fuel cost, speed performance, hire, voyage duration, and charterparty warranties are closely connected. A ship that steams slower than described or burns more bunkers than warranted can create substantial financial loss for Charterers. At the same time, Shipowners may face unfair claims if weather, currents, sea conditions, hull fouling, routeing, draft, trim, engine orders, or charterparty wording are not properly considered.

In a time charter, the Charterer normally pays hire and supplies or pays for bunkers. Therefore, the Charterer is directly exposed to both lost time and bunker cost. The Shipowner must provide a ship that matches the charterparty description and must maintain the ship so that it can perform the ordered employment with reasonable efficiency. The balance between these obligations is usually controlled by the speed and consumption clause, the performance clause, the weather definitions, the “about” allowances, and any qualification such as Without Guarantee (WOG).

Assessing Ship Performance

Assessing Ship Performance begins with the ship’s speed and consumption description in the charterparty. The description normally applies when the charterparty is made and, depending on the wording and legal analysis, may also be important at delivery. The essential question is not whether the ship maintains the described speed every hour of the charter. The question is whether the ship has the capability described in the charterparty and whether Shipowners have maintained the ship in a condition that allows her to perform according to that description.

When evaluating ship performance, it is important to distinguish between capability and actual result. A warranted speed is generally a promise about what the ship is capable of achieving under agreed conditions, not a promise that the ship will consistently maintain that speed regardless of weather, sea state, currents, traffic separation schemes, congestion, engine instructions, fuel quality, or other voyage realities.

A normal performance analysis first identifies the distance steamed during favorable weather conditions. That distance is then divided by the number of hours of good weather to calculate the actual good-weather speed. The calculated good-weather speed is then used to assess whether the ship met the warranted speed, after applying any agreed or customary allowances.

After establishing the actual good-weather performance, the analyst may compare the total voyage time at actual performance speed with the time that would have been required at warranted speed. If the actual time exceeds the warranted time after proper allowances, the result may show under-performance. However, every performance claim depends on the precise wording of the charterparty and the evidence available.

Example of Ship Performance:

Consider a ship warranted to steam at about 11.5 knots on about 30 tons of LSIFO per day under good weather conditions. The charterparty states that performance is assessed leg by leg from pilot station to pilot station. The agreed distance table shows a voyage distance of 3,400 nautical miles. During the voyage, there are 10 days of good weather, equal to 240 hours, and the ship covers 2,200 nautical miles in those good-weather periods. The ship’s average daily fuel consumption during the relevant steaming period is 31 tons.

The good-weather speed calculation is:

Good weather miles 2,200
———————————— = 9.16 knots
Good weather hours 240

The time required for the whole voyage at the calculated good-weather speed is:

Distance of Voyage 3,400
———————————— = 15.465 days
Good weather speed 9.16

The time that should have been required at the warranted speed is:

Distance of voyage 3,400
———————————- = 12.878 days
Warranted Speed 11

The time lost is therefore:

Time lost 15.465 days – 12.878 days = 2.587 days

If the daily hire rate is $50,000, the value of the lost time is:

Value of time lost $50,000 x 2.587 = $129,350, less any commission where applicable.

The calculation of bunkers over-consumed must be handled separately. If the ship consumed 31 tons per day against a warranted consumption of about 30 tons per day, the extra 1 ton per day may fall within the ‘ABOUT’ allowance of 5%. In that case, there may be no direct over-consumption claim for the ordinary steaming period. However, because the ship lost time due to speed deficiency, additional bunkers were consumed during that excess time. Charterers may be entitled to recover the value of those bunkers if the clause and calculation support the claim.

Therefore:

1. Excess time 2.587 days x 30 tons warranted consumption = 77.61 tons
2. Less 5% allowance for about 77.61 x 95% = 73.73 tons
3. Agreed bunker price $1,000 per ton x 73.73 = $73,730

Charterers’ total claim will be:

Value of time lost $129,350
Excess bunker consumption $73,730
TOTAL $203,080

This example is simplified, but it shows the main approach. Depending on the charterparty’s Performance Clause, further issues may have to be included, such as current allowances, sea state, wind force, swell, engine revolutions, charterer’s speed orders, routeing instructions, weather routeing company methodology, and the treatment of bad-weather periods.

In more complicated claims, the reasoning in Didymi v Atlantic Lines is often relevant. Once a breach of speed warranty is established under good-weather conditions, the consequences may have to be assessed over the wider voyage. Evidence may be needed to show how the ship would have performed during less favourable periods if she had been capable of meeting the warranted performance. This is where expert evidence, naval architecture analysis, weather routeing data, and engine performance records can become important.

For high-value claims over long charter periods, technical expert assistance is usually prudent. The foundations of any claim remain the charterparty wording, reliable voyage evidence, accepted weather data, agreed distance tables, bunker figures, and clear calculation method. If the parties have agreed to a Routeing Company’s formula, that formula should normally be followed. If the performance clause states special rules, the parties must apply those rules even if a different method might otherwise appear more commercially attractive.

Distance measurement should also be specified. If the charterparty does not identify the distance table, disputes may arise because different distance tables can produce different voyage distances. Modern routeing recommendations, emission control areas, traffic separation schemes, piracy avoidance, canal route changes, and safety regulations may also affect the appropriate distance. A precise performance clause should therefore state how distances are measured.

Ship Speed and Bunker Consumption

Ship Speed and Bunker Consumption are usually described together in a time charterparty because they represent the ship’s commercial efficiency. A ship that is fast but consumes excessive bunkers may be unattractive. A ship that consumes little fuel but steams too slowly may cause Charterers to lose time and cargo opportunities. The key commercial measure is the balance between speed, consumption, reliability, and cargo-carrying employment.

Ship Speed

Ship Speed in a time charterparty is usually stated in the ship description clause. Standard forms such as the New York Produce Exchange Form (NYPE) and Baltime Time Charter Party often describe the ship as capable of steaming “about” a stated number of knots in good weather and smooth water on “about” a stated quantity of fuel.

The word “ABOUT” is important. It qualifies the figures and prevents the ship description from being treated as mathematically exact. Under English Law, “about” gives some tolerance for minor differences between the described figure and actual performance. It recognises that ships are not laboratory machines. Their speed and consumption can be affected by hull condition, propeller condition, draft, trim, age, engine setting, sea margin, maintenance, fuel quality, and weather.

For example, minor differences in tonnage, capacity, or ship condition may not always be reflected in the latest fixture description. the use of “ABOUT” accommodates such minor discrepancies. Similarly, speed and consumption may decline slightly over time because of normal wear, hull fouling, propeller roughness, sea growth, or engine condition. The word “about” gives Shipowners some protection for small deviations.

The term “ABOUT” does not specify a fixed margin of error. In practical London arbitration, an allowance of 0.5 knots is reasonable for a ship’s speed in many cases. For example, if a ship is described as capable of steaming about 15 knots, performance at 14.5 knots or above may often be treated as within the allowance, depending on the facts and wording. Conversely, for a bonus for over-performance, the ship may need to exceed 15.5 knots before Shipowners can claim a benefit.

The leading case on speed and bunker consumption is The AI Bida. The Court of Appeal considered the meaning of “about” and made clear that the allowance depends on the facts, including ship type, configuration, size, draft, trim, and the commercial context. Although London arbitrations commonly apply half a knot as a working figure, it is not an automatic legal rule. The result may differ if the charterparty wording or ship characteristics justify a different approach.

The half-knot approach can also produce uneven commercial effects. A half-knot allowance is 5% for a ship steaming at 10 knots but only 2.5% for a ship steaming at 20 knots. This is one reason why well-drafted clauses should state the intended tolerance rather than leaving the matter to custom, argument, or arbitration.

Ship Bunker (Fuel) Consumption

Ship Bunker (Fuel) Consumption is usually treated in a similar way to speed. If the charterparty says the ship consumes “about” a certain number of tons per day, a practical allowance is often applied. Although there is no universal legal rule, a margin of 5% is commonly used in many performance calculations.

The 5% allowance is often accepted in London arbitration practice, but it should not be assumed in every case without checking the charterparty wording. The parties may agree a different allowance, exclude an allowance, or provide a detailed calculation formula.

Charterers sometimes argue that if a ship is allowed half a knot tolerance on speed, then the fuel consumption figure should also be adjusted downward if the ship is slower. For example, if a ship warranted to consume 30 tons per day steams half a knot below the stated speed, Charterers may argue that the warranted consumption should be reduced by 5%, resulting in a claim for over-consumed due to underperformance fuel. This argument has not generally found strong support unless the performance clause expressly provides for such an adjustment.

Fuel consumption claims should distinguish between direct over-consumption and additional fuel consumed during time lost. Direct over-consumption concerns whether the ship burned more than the warranted daily consumption. Additional consumption during time lost concerns fuel used because the ship took longer to complete the voyage due to deficient speed. The calculation and legal basis may be different.

Ship Bunker (Fuel) Consumption Without Guarantee (WOG)

Ship Bunker (Fuel) Consumption Without Guarantee (WOG) is a separate issue from the “about” allowance. Shipowners increasingly qualify ship descriptions by adding Without Guarantee (WOG). The phrase may appear as part of broader wording such as All Details About and Without Guarantee (ADAWOG).

WOG wording can have a major legal effect. In Japy Frere v Sutherland, the Court of Appeal considered “without guarantee” in relation to ship description. The decision indicates that such wording may remove a contractual promise and protect Shipowners from liability for breach of that description. The principle can apply not only to deadweight but also to speed and consumption descriptions, depending on wording.

In The Lendoudis Evangelos II, the court considered wording connected with an estimated voyage duration and held that the qualification could also exclude a duty of care, leaving only an obligation of honesty. In The Lipa, the issue was considered directly in relation to speed and bunker consumption. The court supported the arbitrator’s approach that WOG wording in the description clause may negate a contractual obligation regarding speed and consumption.

The practical result is important. If speed and consumption figures are stated WOG, Charterers may find it difficult to pursue an ordinary performance warranty claim. They may be left only with a claim based on dishonesty or fraud, which is much more difficult to prove and may create procedural complications. Therefore, both Charterers and Shipowners must be clear about whether speed and consumption figures are guaranteed, qualified by “about,” stated WOG, or subject to a separate performance clause.

Effect of Currents

Effect of Currents can be commercially significant. A ship steaming against a 2 or 3 knot current for several days may show a noticeable drop in performance, even though the ship’s engine and hull condition are satisfactory. Conversely, a following current may improve apparent speed over ground and reduce voyage time.

The treatment of currents depends on the charterparty wording and the evidence. Some arbitrators may disregard currents where the clause assesses performance only in good weather. Others may take currents into account, particularly where the performance claim concerns a specific voyage and the current effect is material. Over long charter periods and varied routes, current effects may be treated as balancing out and may be deemed neutral and disregarded.

Modern performance clauses sometimes specify whether currents are included or excluded. Weather routeing companies may also apply formulas that adjust for current or separate speed through water from speed over ground. If the parties want current effects to be handled in a particular way, the clause should say so clearly.

Time Charter Vs Voyage Charter Comparison

Time Charter Vs Voyage Charter Comparison is important because ship performance has different commercial consequences under each structure. In a voyage charter, the Shipowner is normally paid freight for carrying a cargo from one port to another, and the Shipowner bears the cost of bunkers and voyage time subject to demurrage and other terms. In a time charter, the Charterer pays hire for time and usually bears the bunker cost. Therefore, poor speed and high consumption directly affect the Charterer.

Time charters may last a few days, a single trip, several months, or several years. A ship may perform many voyages across different weather zones, currents, drafts, routes, and cargo conditions. This raises the question: how is performance measured in such varied scenarios? The answer is found in the charterparty.

Some time charters measure performance voyage by voyage. Others measure performance over a longer period, such as a year or the full charter. Standard tanker forms may include printed performance calculation provisions, while dry cargo charters often use rider clauses. The drafting decides whether Shipowners can offset good performance on one voyage against poor performance on another.

In The Gas Enterprise, the BEEPEETIME Charter Party form required average speed and bunker consumption to be calculated by reference to distance, time, and bunkers consumed on each sea passage as directed by Charterers. If the ship’s average speed on a passage was lower or higher than instructed, resulting time losses or savings and related costs were adjusted accordingly.

In Didymi Corporation v Atlantic Lines & Navigation, the court considered good-weather provisions in a time-based performance review. The clause provided for performance to be reviewed at the end of the charter period and allowed Charterers a hire reduction if the ship failed to maintain the stipulated speed or consumption.

In The AI Bida, a distinction was drawn between speed and consumption. The ship’s speed was to be averaged over yearly periods, while consumption figures were evaluated on a voyage-by-voyage basis. This meant Shipowners could benefit from faster periods when speed was averaged, but they remained accountable for voyages where over-consumption occurred.

For Shipowners, averaging over a longer period may smooth the effect of hull fouling, isolated engine issues, or unfavourable voyage conditions. For Charterers, a voyage-by-voyage assessment may be preferable because it prevents good voyages from masking poor ones. The desired approach must be drafted clearly.

Ship Performance and Deductions from Ship Hire

Ship Performance and Deductions from Ship Hire can become contentious. After end-of-charter calculations, the ship may be found to have failed to achieve Warranted Speed but consumed less Bunkers (Fuels) than expected. Charterers may claim Overpaid Hire for lost time, while Shipowners may claim a Bonus or credit for bunker savings if the clause allows it.

The parties may settle the adjustment before redelivery or at the final hire reconciliation. If no agreement is reached, Charterers may consider deducting claims from hire. This can be risky. Wrongful hire deductions may give Shipowners rights under the charterparty, including possible withdrawal if hire is not paid properly.

The Nanfri suggests that Charterers may deduct from hire in certain circumstances where ship use has been substantially reduced. The Chrysovalandou Oyo supported deduction for unmet speed warranties where lost time could be treated as loss of use. However, deducting for over-consumption presents higher risks because fuel over-consumption is not always the same as loss of use of the ship.

Charterers are advised to delay any deductions until the final hire payment where possible, so that the claim can be calculated more accurately and asserted in good faith. Premature or excessive deductions may expose Charterers to allegations of non-payment of hire.

In severe cases, performance failure may justify termination if the breach is sufficiently serious. The Aegean Dolphin shows that where performance deficiencies strike at the commercial purpose of the charter, termination may be considered. However, termination should be a last resort. Charterers must avoid waiving their rights by continuing to treat the charter as valid after learning of the breach.

Ship Speed and Weather

Ship Speed and Weather are inseparable in performance analysis. Wind, sea state, swell, current, wave direction, and heavy weather can reduce speed and increase fuel consumption. A ship that performs properly in good weather may lose speed in head seas or heavy swell without being in breach.

Most speed and consumption warranties apply only ‘in good weather conditions.’ If the charterparty does not define good weather, the market often treats good weather as conditions up to Force 4 on the Beaufort Scale, with moderate breeze, wind speeds around 11 to 16 knots, and relatively small waves. However, this is not automatic. The charterparty wording and ship type matter.

Above Force 4, adverse weather may reduce speed and increase bunker consumption. Heavy swell, even with lower wind force, can also affect performance. Wave direction is important. A following sea may have a different effect from head seas or beam seas. For smaller, faster ships, a lower Beaufort threshold may be appropriate. For large tankers or large bulk carriers, the clause may permit assessment in higher wind conditions because such ships may be less affected by moderate wind.

At the end of a voyage or charter period, analysts usually identify the periods that qualify as good weather and use those periods to establish the ship’s capability. However, the consequences of under-performance may extend beyond good-weather periods if the clause and evidence support extrapolation.

Charterparties should define good weather precisely. They may state maximum wind force, maximum Douglas Sea State, maximum swell height, no adverse current, no negative current, no current exceeding a stated level, no abnormal sea, or other conditions. The more precise the clause, the lower the risk of dispute.

Ship Performance Intermediate (Innominate) Term

Ship Performance Intermediate (Innominate) Term concerns the legal classification of performance obligations under English law. Contractual terms may be classified as Conditions, Warranties, or Intermediate Terms (or Innominate Terms). The classification determines the remedy for breach.

If a condition is breached, the innocent party may usually terminate and claim damages. If a warranty is breached, the remedy is normally damages only. If an intermediate term is breached, the remedy depends on the seriousness of the consequences. A serious breach may justify termination; a less serious breach may justify damages only.

Speed and consumption descriptions in time charterparties are often treated as warranties, meaning that ordinary under-performance gives Charterers a damages claim but not an automatic right to terminate. Charterers may claim damages for lost time and extra fuel consumed. However, if the ship’s speed is crucial and the deficiency is severe enough to deprive Charterers of substantially the whole benefit of the charter, termination may be arguable under the intermediate term approach.

Most time charterparties describe the ship’s capability in the opening description clause. NYPE wording may state that the ship is capable of steaming fully laden in good weather at about a stated speed on about a stated fuel consumption. Baltime uses similar wording referring to good weather and smooth water. These basic promises are often expanded by rider clauses dealing with weather, currents, routeing company assessment, hull fouling, sea conditions, and performance calculation.

A difficult question is when the ship must match the description. Older authority suggested that the description had to be true when the charterparty was made, not necessarily at delivery. Later authority, including The Apollonius, emphasized the commercial importance of the ship matching the description at delivery. If the ship becomes fouled between fixture and delivery and cannot meet the described performance at delivery, Charterers may have remedies depending on the facts and wording.

English law does not generally allow Charterers to claim under-performance merely because the ship does not constantly steam at the described speed throughout the charter. The claim must be tied to the contractual description, delivery condition, maintenance obligation, or specific performance clause. This makes careful drafting and evidence essential.

Ship Performance

Ship Performance is a central part of time charter economics. If one of the Charterer’s most important obligations is to pay hire, one of the Shipowner’s most important obligations is to provide and maintain a ship capable of performing the service ordered under the charterparty.

A Charterer wants to maximize the commercial use of the ship. This means reliable speed, reasonable bunker consumption, cargo readiness, working cargo gear where applicable, good maintenance, and minimal delay. When time charter hire and bunker prices are high, even a single day of under-performance can create significant financial loss.

Performance disputes can be expensive because they combine law, engineering, navigation, meteorology, mathematics, fuel analysis, and charterparty interpretation. The best protection is clear drafting. The Performance Clauses should define speed, consumption, weather, sea state, swell, currents, distance tables, calculation method, routeing company role, hull fouling treatment, engine orders, margins, deductions, bonuses, and evidence.

Expert Advice on Ship Performance

Expert Advice on Ship Performance is often necessary because a performance claim may look simple but become technically difficult. Weather reports may disagree. Noon reports may be incomplete. Current data may be disputed. Fuel figures may need reconciliation. Distances may differ between tables. Engine logs may show reduced RPM. The ship may have been instructed to slow steam. Hull fouling may affect later voyages. Bad weather may require extrapolation.

A well-crafted Performance Clause can reduce uncertainty before the dispute begins. It can identify the data source, routeing company, weather threshold, current treatment, allowance, and claim procedure. A precise clause is cheaper than an arbitration over unclear wording.

Performance claims should be handled with discipline. The parties should collect noon reports, weather routeing reports, engine logs, bunker delivery notes, soundings, draft data, distance tables, AIS track data, charterer orders, master’s messages, and port records. Without reliable evidence, both claims and defences become weaker.

Ship Fuel Consumption and Slow Steaming

Slow steaming has become common because reducing speed can substantially reduce fuel consumption. Fuel consumption does not normally fall in a simple straight line with speed. A small speed reduction may produce a significant bunker saving, depending on ship design, engine load, hull condition, and weather.

However, slow steaming must be consistent with the charterparty and Charterer’s orders. If Charterers instruct economical speed, the performance assessment should not treat the ship as underperforming merely because she did not steam at full warranted speed. Conversely, if the ship is ordered to steam at warranted speed and cannot do so in good weather, Charterers may have a claim.

Ship Fuel Consumption and Hull Fouling

Hull fouling can significantly affect speed and consumption. Marine growth on the hull and propeller increases resistance, reduces speed, and increases fuel consumption. Fouling may develop during long idle periods, warm-water waiting, port stays, or low-speed operations.

Charterparties sometimes contain hull fouling clauses. These clauses may allocate responsibility for cleaning, performance loss, underwater inspection, propeller polishing, and time lost. Without clear wording, disputes may arise over whether under-performance is due to Shipowner maintenance failure, Charterer employment, long waiting orders, or ordinary trading conditions.

Ship Fuel Consumption and Engine Performance

Engine condition is another major factor. Main engine efficiency, turbocharger condition, fuel injection, cylinder condition, engine load, shaft power, auxiliary consumption, boiler use, and fuel quality can all affect bunker consumption. A ship may be mechanically capable of higher speed but restricted by engine problems or maintenance issues.

Engine logbooks, planned maintenance records, class records, lubricating oil analysis, fuel analysis, and chief engineer reports may become important evidence in performance claims. If a ship cannot achieve warranted speed because of engine deficiency, Shipowners may face a stronger claim than where performance was affected by weather or currents.

Ship Fuel Consumption and Bunker Quality

Bunker quality can affect consumption and engine performance. Poor fuel may cause lower calorific value, sludge formation, purifier problems, filter blockage, combustion issues, catalytic fines damage, or engine wear. If Charterers supply bunkers under a time charter, responsibility for fuel quality may become relevant when performance is disputed.

Fuel sampling, bunker delivery notes, laboratory analysis, engine records, and protest letters should be preserved. A performance claim may be weakened if the under-performance was caused by unsuitable fuel supplied by Charterers.

Draft, Trim, and Cargo Condition

Draft and trim affect ship resistance and fuel consumption. A ship deeply loaded, trimmed poorly, or carrying high windage cargo may consume more fuel and lose speed. Performance warranties often assume a particular condition such as fully laden, ballast, design draft, or good weather and smooth sea.

Trim optimization can reduce fuel consumption. Modern voyage management often uses trim tables or software to identify efficient sailing condition. However, charterparty performance calculations must still follow the agreed wording.

Weather Routeing Companies and Performance Claims

Weather routeing companies often prepare post-voyage performance reports. These reports may identify good-weather periods, weather delays, currents, distance, speed, consumption, and performance against charterparty warranties. Some charterparties make the weather routeing company’s report binding or semi-binding. Others treat it as evidence only.

If the parties agree that a specific routeing company’s formula will be used, both sides should understand that formula before fixing. The formula may decide how currents, swell, Beaufort force, Douglas Sea State, and bad-weather extrapolation are handled. Disputes often arise because one party assumes a different method from the one actually agreed.

Drafting a Clear Ship Performance Clause

A strong performance clause should address the following points:

1. Warranted speed and consumption figures.
2. Whether the figures are guaranteed, about, or Without Guarantee (WOG).
3. The exact “about” allowance for speed and consumption.
4. Good-weather definition.
5. Wind force, sea state, swell, and current limits.
6. Whether currents are included, excluded, or adjusted.
7. Whether assessment is voyage by voyage, annually, or over the charter period.
8. Distance table or routeing method.
9. Weather routeing company and formula.
10. Whether bonuses for over-performance apply.
11. Whether Charterers may deduct from hire.
12. Procedure and timing for claims.
13. Hull fouling and propeller cleaning provisions.
14. Effect of slow steaming or Charterer’s speed orders.
15. Bunker price used for claim calculations.

Clear wording reduces the risk of expensive disputes. Unclear wording allows both sides to advance plausible but conflicting interpretations.

Conclusion: Ship Fuel Consumption

Ship Fuel Consumption is not only an operational matter. It is a charterparty, legal, commercial, technical, and evidential issue. In time chartering, speed and bunker consumption directly affect hire value, voyage duration, fuel cost, cargo delivery schedules, and overall profitability.

Performance analysis requires more than comparing a noon report with a charterparty speed. The parties must examine good weather, distance, time, bunkers consumed, currents, swell, sea state, engine condition, hull fouling, draft, trim, routeing, and the exact wording of the Performance Clause. The terms “ABOUT”, Without Guarantee (WOG), All Details About and Without Guarantee (ADAWOG), Warranted Speed, Bunkers (Fuels), Overpaid Hire, and Misrepresentation Claim can all have major consequences.

For Shipowners, the best protection is an accurate ship description, proper maintenance, clear records, and realistic warranties. For Charterers, the best protection is precise drafting, reliable evidence, and careful calculation before making deductions. For both sides, a carefully written performance clause is far better than an expensive dispute after the voyage is completed.

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Chartering www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Dry Cargo Chartering Market www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Dry Bulk Cargo Trades www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Shipping Raw Materials www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Bulk Carrier Ship Sizes www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Manager www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Ownership www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Shipping Demand www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Shipping Supply www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about What is Demurrage in Shipping? www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about What is Despatch in Shipping? Despatch Money, Laytime, and Demurrage Explained www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Interruptions and Exceptions to Laytime www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Fixed Laytime www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Customary Laytime www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about When Laytime Starts? www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Laytime and Demurrage: General Principles www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Laytime Calculations www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about What is Laytime? www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Laytime www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Port Services www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about What is Bareboat Charterparty? www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about What is the difference between Bareboat Charter and Demise Charter?  www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Finance: Ship Loans, Mortgages, Equity, Leasing, and Maritime Finance Explained www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Management: Technical Management, Crew Management, SHIPMAN, Port Agents, and Shipowner Responsibilities Explained www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Registration: Flag State, Certificate of Registry, Open Registry, and Ship Ownership Explained www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about Ship Types, Tonnage, Measurements, Cargo Capacity, and Ship Layout Explained www.handybulk.com

We kindly suggest that you visit the web page of HandyBulk to learn more about What is Detention in Ship Chartering? Charterers’ Delay, Demurrage, and Damages Explained www.handybulk.com