业界著名的“Reid Test”，源于法官Reid在The“JohannaOldendorff ”案中所确立的；由于其确立的“Reid Test”至今未被推翻，因此关于“Arrived Ship”的权威定义可见于：
The Johanna Oldendorff [1973] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 285 at page 291, and in particularthe following passage at col 2:
“On the whole matter I think that it ought to be made clear that the essential factor is that before a ship can be treated as an arrived ship she must be within the port and at the immediate and effective disposition of the charterer and that her geographical position is of secondary importance. But for practical purposes it is so much easier to establish that, if the ship is at ausual waiting place within the port, it can generally be presumed that she is there fully at the charterer"s disposal.
Iwould therefore state what I would hope to be the true legal position in thisway. Before a ship can said to have arrived at a port she must, if she cannot proceed immediately to a berth, have reached a position within the port where she is at the immediate and effective disposition of the charterer. If she is at a place where waiting ships usually lie, she will be in such a position unless in some extraordinary circumstances proof of which would lie in the charterer.
If the ship is waiting atsome other place in the port then it will be for the owner to prove that she isas fully at the disposition of the charterer as she would have been if in the vicinity of the berth for loading or discharge.”
简单点说就是在港口租约的情形下，如租约未作特别约定，船舶要到港口范围内，也就是“within the port”，且处于承租人的有效控制下，也就是“at the immediate and effective disposition of thecharterer” 才可被视为到达了约定地点，否则就不是已到达船舶，也就是不是一个“Arrived Ship ”。需说明的是，在该案中强调船舶“要达到港口范围内”，即使是港口或者港口当局让船舶在港口范围外等待，该船舶仍然未到达约定地点。
关于“within the port”和 “at the immediate and effective disposition of thecharterer”的解释如下：
1.Withinthe port
如租约未作特别约定，船舶必需到达港口范围内才可能被视为已到达船舶。因此，如果船舶被命令在港口范围外待泊，船舶就不是已到达船舶。
2.At the immediate and effective disposition of the charterer
船舶必需处于承租人的立即、有效控制之下。所谓处于承租人的立即、有效控制之下，是指如果出现可以靠泊的泊位时，其可马上到达泊位开始卸货；或者需要在锚地开始减载的时候，其可以马上开始减载卸货。
那么，如何判断是否处于承租人的立即、有效控制之下？按照上述引用的Lord Reid的判决原文，如果船舶的待泊地点是在通常的待泊地点，则会初步认为其处于承租人的立即、有效控制之下，如承租人不同意则其负有举证义务。如果船舶待泊地点不是在通常的待泊地点，则船东负有举证义务证明其处于承租人的立即、有效控制之下。
案件回顾：
Under a voyage charterparty of December 1, 1967, the ownersof the motor vessel Johanna Oldendorff chartered her to carry grain from USA to"to London or Avonmouth or Glasgow or Belfast or Liverpool/Birkenhead or Hull’ at the charterers’ option.
Clause 3 provided that:
… Time to count from the first working period on the next day following receipt during ordinary office hours of written notice of readiness to discharge whether in berth or not. Receivers of the cargo are inno case obliged to take delivery at night without their consent. Discharge tobe free of expense to the vessel.
Further to instructions, the vessel proceeded toLiverpool/Birkenhead and anchored at Mersey Bar anchorage on January 2, 1968,but no berth was nominated by then. The next day she proceeded to Prince’s Pierlanding stage, Liverpool, and cleared with the customs. She was then ordered bythe port authority to proceed back to anchor at the bar light vessel.
At 14.40 hours on January 3, 1968, she anchored at the Mersey Bar, the usual waiting place for grain ships discharging at the port,which although within the legal limits of the port was 17 miles from the docks.NOR was tendered and received at 14.30 on January 3. The vessel lay at anchorat the bar from January 3 to 20 ready, so far as she was concerned, to discharge.
The owners claimed demurrage on the ground that the lay time for discharge started at 08.00 on Thursday, January 4, 1968. Their claim fordemurrage depended upon when the vessel became an arrived ship. The arbitrators failed to agree; and, on a reference, the umpire made his award, in the form ofa special case for the opinion of the court, in favour of the owners with analternative award in favour of the charterers. Donaldson J. on appeal on a case stated up held the alternative award in favour of the charterers. The Court of Appeal, by a majority, affirmed that decision.
…..
船东随后开始上诉到贵族院，然后就是Reid 法官发表了他的“ReidTest”。
最后判船东胜诉：由于Mersey Bar处于利物浦港的行政管辖范围内，且其是通常的待泊地点，贵族院判定船舶在Mersey Bar时就是已到达船舶，即自1月4日起就可起算装卸时间。
二、NOR有效性问题
通常情况下，关于如何递交一个有效的NOR-Notice of Readiness条款，会加入各种限制条件，比如只能在工作时间递交，或者只能在星期一到星期五递交，或者只能船到了泊位才能递交，或者必须通过验舱或取得某种证书才可以递交等等，类似的条款如下：
TheNotice of Readiness to load shall be tendered with clean holds, hatches openedand in all respects ready to load, at any time in or out of office hours afterthe vessel has duly arrived at the pilot boarding area at the Loading Portsubject to Free Pratique being granted prior to or on arrival in berth.However, if Free Pratique is not granted prior to or on arrival in berth due tocauses attributable to the vessel then such Notice of Readiness shall be of noeffect and a fresh Notice of Readiness shall be tendered if andwhen the vessel is in Free Pratique with clean holds, hatches opened and in allrespects ready to load.
或
Notice ofReadiness at load port to be tendered upon arrival at anchorage of loading portduring office hours, 0900hrs-1700hrs Monday to Friday provided that the vesselare in all respects to load charterers’ cargo and pass hold inspection…
如果违反约定，那么递交的NOR就不是一个有效的NOR；Laytime也不会自动开始起算，除非一个有效的NOR重新递交之后。
以下列举几个例子：
a.泊位租约
最明显的就是如果泊位空着，NOR只能在泊位递交。类似的有：
NOR SHALL BE TENDERED THEN THE VESEL IS IN THE LOADING ORDISCHARGING BERTH, IF AVAILABLE, AND IS IN ALL RESPECTS READY TO LOAD ORDISCHARGE THE CARGO, UNLESS THE BERTH IS OCCUPIED, NOT AVAILABLE ON THEVESSEL’S ARRIVAL, WHERE UPON THE MASTER MAY TENDER THE SAID NOR FROM A LAY BERTHOR ANCHORAGE WITHIN THE PORT LIMITS..
需要注意的是，很多时候，船长忙于业务，都是按惯常思维，到了就递交NOR。如果到的时候泊位被别的船占了还好，如果泊位空着，但因为各种原因，比如需等潮水，或者不能夜航，或者等里面的船先出来，封港封航等等原因，需在锚地等，那么这种情况下船长递交的NOR就不是一个有效的NOR。不管因为种种原因在外面等待多久，无效的NOR都不会变成一个有效的NOR，Laytime也不会自动开始起算。
这种情况下，在合同里加入“berth are reachable upon arrival” 变得很重要。
在672LMLN3 LONDONARBITATION 16/05 该判例中，船从RASTANURA 装丁烷到FUJAIRAH卸，船长在EOSP的时候1045就递交了NOR，1200抛锚。法官判NOR 无效，因为不是到达船；但船东可以索赔Damage，因为合同里加入了“reachable upon arrival” 。船舶到达的时候母船还没来，导致无法递交有效的NOR，租家违约，所以船东可以索赔损失。
同时又因递交的NOR无效，Laytime只能从开始卸货开始起算。
b.需通过验舱
在409 LNLN 3-LONDONARBITRATION 11/95案里，船到ROSARIO装货，因为泊位有船，船需要在在ZONA COMUN抛锚等泊，于是船东在ZONA COMUN那里就递交了NOR。
租约中关于NOR的规定：
TIME TO COUNT FROM THE FIRST WORKING PERIOD ON THENEXTBUSINESS DAY FOLLOWING VESSEL’S CUSTOMS CLEARANCE AND RECEIPT AT THE OFFICEOF CHARTERERS’ AGENT OF WRITTEN NOR ACCOMPANIES BY PASS OF ANY NATIONAL AND/OROTHER REGULARTORY BODIES AS MAY BE REQUIRED, AND /OR INDEPENDENT SURVEYORS ASSELECTED BY CHARTERERS..
最后法官判在ZONA COMUN 递交的NOR无效，因为ZONACOMUN 在ROSARIO的港外，不属于到达船，违反ARRIVED SHIP CRITERION；同时也尚未通过验舱等。
在南美装粮的一定要注意，NOR递交的条件，那些需要通过验舱或者需要取得Fumigation证书的，统统不可接受，要不风险太大了。
在该案中，法官同意船东在第二个港口无需重新递交NOR。
The tribunal would agree with the Owners that, unless therewas a clear requirement written into the charterparty to the contrary, no NORwas required at the second loading port.
如合同无特别约定，那么在第二个港无需重新递交NOR。
c.货舱未备妥
在CobelfretNV v Cyclades Shipping Co Ltd [1994] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 28.案里，法官Colman J.判决NOR无效，因为船舶在递交NOR的时候货舱还没有备妥。在NOR递交两天后，靠泊后验舱不通过，不管船在锚地还是在码头，都不会通过。
d.泊位不可用，验舱不通过，但租家没有实际损失
在The Jay Ganesh,[1994]2 Lloyd’s Rep 358 案里，该轮在锚地递交NOR后，约20天后，租家安排验舱发现货舱有虫子，验舱不通过；要求清舱。10多天后安排靠泊后还是发现有虫，验舱不通过，要求熏蒸，最后通过验舱开始装货。
参照了租约第9条：Laytime Counting
Ifafter berthing the vessel is found not to be ready in all respects toloading/discharge,
theactual time lost until the vessel is in fact ready toload/dischargingshall not count as laytime or as timeon demurrage.
这次Colman J. 判了NOR有效，Laytime正常计算。因为即使船舶不能通过验舱，租家也无法提供泊位给船舶安排装货。如果泊位空了，之后还有损失，则船东应该承担。
e.主机等故障影响靠泊
在669 LMLN 3， London Arbitration 14/05 案里，该轮装60,000吨磷酸盐从AQABA到PARADIP。船于7月9日到PARADIP, 0830递交了NOR; 15日港口船长及引水上船，发现5条缺陷，取消靠泊。
磁罗经不工作
主机无法达到靠泊所需的转数要求
船舶没有当地港口的最大比例尺海图
船舶宣称抵港吃水12.5M SW，但PARADIP允许的最大吃水是12.5M DOCK WATER。
船舶超吃水，首倾，主机、舵反应不灵敏。
25日又重新上船检验，26日同意靠泊；因为拥挤，最后30日靠泊开始卸货。
最后法官判NOR有效；就算租家认为NOR无效，船员在修复第一项缺陷后，别的都没有修复；租家也无法举证磁罗经在递交NOR的时候无法工作。同时在锚地等待是因为港口拥挤，这些因素不足以令Laytime停止计算。
船东胜诉，租家得付全部的滞期费。
因此在一个初步认为有效的NOR递交之后，在准备靠泊或装卸货的时候，发现主机无法启动、锚机卡了无法绞起锚、舱盖打不开、吊坏了、或者验舱不通过等等船东方面的原因。但如果租家在这段时间里仍然无法提供泊位装卸货，也就是说租家没有实际损失的情况下，NOR有效，Laytime正常计算。
f.船未到达习惯性锚地
在 725 LMLN 2 London Arbitration 21/07 案里，合同第六条规定如下：
Clause 6 of Part II of the Asbatankvoy form of charterstated:
“Upon arrival at customary anchorage at each port of …discharge, the Master shall give the Charterer … notice … that the Vessel isready to … discharge and laytime, as hereinafter provided shall commence uponthe expiration of six hours after receipt of such notice or upon the Vessel’sarrival in berth … which first occurs.”
当时泊位不可用，船于12月11日抵达Lagos Pilot Station 南部约50海里的地方开始加油，并递交NOR。
法官意见如下：
In the tribunal’s view “anchorage” in clause 6 could notbe read too literally. The situation in the waters off Lagos was notorious.There were other places in the world where, for similar reasons, tankers didnot anchor whilst awaiting berths. There had to be others were it was not, fortechnical reasons, possible or advisable, physically to anchor. To deprive anowner of the right to give a valid notice of readiness under the Asbatankvoyform of charter in such circumstances seemed to the tribunal wholly unreasonableand not what the parties could have intended.
也就是说合同内关于锚地的解释不能过于书面化，鉴于Lagos那地方存在海盗等风险，即使船未到达合同约定的锚地， NOR仍然应该被认为有效。
综合以上各个判例，总体的原则就是必须按照合同要求递交NOR，要不一个无效的NOR不会自动变为有效的NOR。
结合合同Laytime计算的条款，如果在一个初步认为有效的NOR递交之后，因为船东方面的原因，发现一开始递交的NOR可能无效，比如不能通过验舱等情况，但这些又没有给租家造成额外的损失，比如租家不能在这段时间内提供泊位装卸货，那么仍然应该被认为是有效的NOR。
三、船舶实列
“合平”轮第26航次执行的国内某钢厂的COA货载，租家安排到鲅鱼圈+湛江港卸。
合同的主要条款如下：
8.B.a
Upon completion ofloading, the vessel shall proceed to one safe berth each of one or two safeport, as set forth in the Contract, always be safely afloat, free of risks,expenses to Owners.
8.B.b
If the second discharge port is Bayuquan, Charterersshall arrange lightening at the first discharge port.
11.B.c
At the first discharging port Dalian or Bayuquan, Noticeof Readiness shall be tendered any time any day Sunday holiday included,provided the vessel is ready for discharging.
11.B.d:
At the second discharging port Bayuquan, Notice ofReadiness shall be tendered any time any day Sunday holiday included, provided thevessel is ready for discharging.
及装港的NOR:
Notice of Readiness may be tendered after arrivalof the vessel at the inner harbor area, including the inner anchorage are, ofloading port, at any time irrespective of official office hours, Saturdays,Sundays and holidays included, whether the vessel is in berth or not, providedthat the vessel is within the agreed Laydays, in free pratique, gas free,cleared by port authorities and ready to receive cargo in every respect,otherwise Notice of Readiness will be canceled…
在租家宣卸港为鲅鱼圈+湛江港的时候，因为不是合同内的港口，事前发了如下邮件，租家同意并确认：
Charterers will holdOwners’ harmless, free of risks, expenses to the Owners for calling Bayuquan& Zhanjiang, and further confirm these two ports are safe for the vessel.
其实“calling”在这里不仅仅是在港内，包括了整个挂靠的过程；租家愿意承担的风险夸大了。而关于辽东湾浅滩、演习等风险也都事前沟通过，双方对这些风险都异常清楚了解。
船于12月9号抵达辽东湾浅滩，因为浅滩那水深不足，加上天气不好，船在抛锚后递交了NOR。租家抗辩说船不是到达船，NOR无效。
我们发了如下邮件：
Furtherto Owners’ message date 12/Dec as below, For avoid any unpleasant situation,Owners wish to draw Charterers’ keen attention to below:
a.Charterers reply on The Johanna Oldendorffcase , contended that vessel should be an
“arrived” ship; but in thatcase Owners succeed their award finally, Charterers alleged the vessel is notan “arrived ” ship was dismissed by Lord Reid.
Ownersfully agreed with the Lord Reid his test in that case, in particular “Arrivedship” as passage at col 2:
…On the whole matter I think that it ought to be madeclear that the essential factor is that before a ship can be treated as anarrived ship she must be within the port and at the immediate and effectivedisposition of the charterers…
Butpursuant to clause 11.B.c and d of this COA which provided that:
At the first discharging port Dalian or Bayuquan, Noticeof Readiness shall be tendered any time any day Sunday holiday included,provided the vessel is ready for discharging.
And11.B.d:
At the second discharging port Bayuquan, Notice ofReadiness shall be tendered any time any day Sunday holiday included, providedthe vessel is ready for discharging.
Whichis rather different as NOR for load port which reads:
Notice of Readiness may be tendered after arrival ofthe vessel at the inner harbor area, including the inner anchorage are, ofloading port, at any time irrespective of official office hours, Saturdays,Sundays and holidays included, whether the vessel is in berth or not, providedthat the vessel is within the agreed Laydays, in free pratique, gas free,cleared by port authorities and ready to receive cargo in every respect,otherwise Notice of Readiness will be canceled…
As thecharterers well aware that English law will be applied and under English commonlaw, Freedom of Contract is the common sense. In present case, We mutual agreeand stipulate that Notice of Readiness shall be tendered any time any daySunday holiday included, provided the vessel is ready for discharging. It’srather clear and no doubt that the Master is entitled to tender NOR on 9th/Dec2016 at 0320hrs when his vessel drop anchor there.
Thus this NOR tendered on 9th/Dec 2016 at 0320hrs is valid.
Thesimilar case the charterers please refer to London Arbitration 21/07 725LMLN 2, In that case, the Tribunal’s view “ anchorage “ in clause 6 could notbe read too literally, the situation in the waters off Lagos was notorious,there were other places in the world where, for similar reasons, tankers didnot anchor whilst awaiting berths.. The Tribunal held NOR is valid, theOwners/Master are entitled to tender NOR when the vessel take bunkering atsouth of the Lagos Pilot station, which was 50 miles away and not within theport limit even if the clause which stipulated that: Upon arrival at customaryanchorage at each port of ..discharge..”
b.Safety warranty
As pergoverning clause 8.B.a of this COA, Which read:
the vessel shall proceed to one safe berth each of one ortwo safe port, as set forth in this Contract, always be safely afloat, freeof risks, expenses to Owners.
Thevessel proceed to Bayuquan, the vessel have to transit liaodong shoal. Butthere is no sufficient dept for the vesel of liaodong shoal there. The vesselwill be not safely afloat. Hence that the port is not safe for the vessel, thecharterers therefore breach their safety warranty.
Thecharterers have to compensate Owners’ loss which result from they breach theirsafety warranty in this regard.
c.Requirements for transit liaodong shoal
Assumethe charterers may recall that in year of 2010, 2012, we have reached anagreements, one of that is provided the weather condition for wind is less than6. The charterers also have no objection for this. As Owners clarify earlier,the wind is upto 7-8, hence that the Master is entitled to drop anchor to waitfor suitable weather condition &tide, i.e Owners never breach agreement.
d.The confirmation
Inrespect of liaodong shoal and risks, The charterers well aware that the vesselmay have to drop anchor to wait for suitable weather condition & tide,Before they fix Bayuquan+Zhanjiang as discharge ports, the Charterers reconfirmbelow:
Charterers will hold Owners’harmless, free of risks, expenses to the Owners for calling Bayuquan &Zhanjiang, and further confirm these two ports are safe for the vessel.
Needlessto say that the vessel could not transit liaodong shoal due to draft limitationwill cause time lost which is one of risk for calling Bayuquan. If thecharterers wish to relieve their risks, before confirm Owners’ requirement,they should require and insist that the Owners should delete the words “free ofrisks”.
Hencethat this kind of risk and further naval militaryexercises also should be for charterers’ their sole risks.
If no charterers’ confirmation to bear those risks,Owners will not accept the vessel to discharge at Bayuquan as 1stdischarge port, the charterers should discharge at Dalian or otherport-Caofeidian firstly.
e.As per governing clause8.B.b as following:
If the second discharge port is Bayuquan, Charterersshall arrange lightening at the first discharge port.
It’sclear that the charterers should arrange lightening at the first dischargeport, but the charterers never arrange this lightening and require the vesselto proceed to Bayuquan directly. Hence that the charterers’ this arrangementwill put them in breach in this regard.
f.Refer to attached line-up information, thedesigned berth No.18 was occupied by other vessel until the vessel berth on 18th/Dec.
Thecharterers only could claim their net loss as damage if any, in present case,the berth was occupied by other vessel, the vessel could not get alongside,there is no any net loss for charterers.
Thesame the charterers please refer to London Arbitration 14/05 669 LMLN 3and The case [1994]2 Lloyd’s Rep 358, The Lord Jay Ganesh held that laytimestill to count even if the vessel could not pass hold inspection due to theberth was occupied by other vessel, the charterers could not provide the berthfor the vessel therefore there is no any loss for the charterers.
Hopeabove are clear enough and will be acceptable by the charterers.
Charterers’positive confirmation will be highly appreciated.
关于此案，租家抗辩的唯一理由是船不是到达船，但在合同里又没有要求必须是到达船才可以递交NOR，仅仅要求准备就绪。个人认为即使租家抗辩递交的NOR无效，但由于租家违约在先，因此租家也得赔偿船东损失。
限于个人的专业知识水平，个人以为NOR-Notice of Readiness，字面解释就是准备就绪通知书，船方把备妥的这个事实通知到对方即可，而没有别的含义。不会自动加上附件条件，比如必须是到达船才可以称为NOR，不是到达船这个准备就绪通知书就不能称为NOR。因此在合同中，如果要求在某种条件下才可以递交一个有效的NOR， 开始Laytime起算，那么必须在合同内列明这些限制条件，比如船必须到达锚地才可以递交，或者比如必须在星期一到星期五的工作时间才能递交，或者必须船到了泊位才可以递交，或者必须取得某种证书必须通过验舱，或者Free Pratique，或者必须取得DPC检验合格证书等等这些条件来限制递交的NOR有效性问题。要不在英国普通法下，Freedom of Contract,订约自由，在事后非常困难去反证当时签约的时候不是基于自愿原则。
