Notice of Readiness (NOR)

What a Notice of Readiness is

A Notice of Readiness is the master’s formal declaration that the ship has arrived at the agreed port or berth and is ready in all respects to load or discharge the contractual cargo. Under a voyage charter it is the event that starts laytime, the period the charterer is allowed for cargo work before demurrage becomes payable. The NOR is tendered to the charterer or their agent, almost always in writing.

“NOR tendered” is the phrase used the moment the master serves that notice. Tendering does not by itself start the clock: laytime begins at the time the charter fixes, which on many forms is a set hour after a valid NOR is received. What matters is that the NOR be valid when tendered, because an invalid NOR has no effect at all.

Why NOR matters

A voyage charter party allocates time risk between the shipowner and the charterer through the laytime and demurrage framework. The framework needs a clear starting event: from when does the laytime clock begin? That event is the valid Notice of Readiness.

If the NOR is invalid, whether premature, defective or improperly served, it does not start laytime. The ship may sit for hours or days waiting for a valid NOR to be re-tendered while the owner carries the cost without compensation. The stakes are direct. A vessel on a demurrage rate of USD 20,000 a day that loses two days to an invalid NOR has lost USD 40,000 on a single call. NOR validity is, by common account among P&I clubs and demurrage desks, the most frequent single battleground in laytime disputes.

Three things have to line up: what the parties agreed in the charter, what is customary at the specific port, and what the ship was actually like when the notice went in. A careful master, broker and charter-party draftsperson address all three in advance. Loose drafting or unfamiliar port practice produces disputes.

The arrived-ship requirement

Before any NOR can be valid, the ship has to be an “arrived ship,” and what that means depends on whether the fixture is a port charter or a berth charter.

Under a port charter the test is the one Lord Reid set out in the House of Lords in The Johanna Oldendorff [1974] AC 479: the ship is arrived when it has reached the port and is at the immediate and effective disposition of the charterer, which in practice means at the berth or, if no berth is free, at the usual waiting place within the port. The Maratha Envoy [1978] AC 1 applied that test strictly: the usual waiting place must lie within the port’s legal limits. A ship anchored at a waiting station outside those limits, as the Maratha Envoy was at the Weser Lightship, is not an arrived ship and cannot give a valid NOR, however close it sits to the port.

The modern test took decades to settle. The earlier House of Lords decision in The Aello [1961] AC 135 had asked whether the ship had reached the “commercial area” of the port, a test that proved hard to apply at congested ports with distant anchorages. The Johanna Oldendorff replaced it with the cleaner “immediate and effective disposition” formula, and The Maratha Envoy then fixed the port-limits boundary that the Reid test still uses.

Under a berth charter the ship is, in principle, only arrived when it reaches the named berth. NOR can’t be tendered from the anchorage while the berth stands empty. The practical answer to that rigidity is the WIBON family of clauses, covered below, which let a berth-charter ship tender from the waiting place when the berth is occupied.

The distinction is commercial, not academic: it fixes who carries the risk of port congestion. On a port charter the charterer broadly carries it from the moment the ship is within port limits; on a plain berth charter the owner carries it until the ship is at the berth.

The three conditions for a valid NOR

Condition 1: Arrival at the agreed point

The ship must have physically reached the contractual point: within the port limits for a port charter, at the berth for a berth charter, subject to any WIBON or WIPON clause. Position is judged against the chart and the port’s defined limits, not by how near the ship feels to the cargo.

Condition 2: Readiness in all respects

The ship must be ready, physically and legally, to start cargo work at once on the charterer’s order:

• Cargo holds clean and dry, or in the condition the cargo requires.
• Hatches and hatch covers operable.
• Cargo gear, where the ship’s gear is used, tested and working.
• Ballast condition right for the operation: enough ballast for stability during loading, deballasting able to keep pace on discharge.
• For tankers, tanks clean to the agreed standard, the inert gas system working, lines and pumps tested.
• Free pratique and customs clearance obtained, where the charter makes them conditions rather than formalities.
• Documentary readiness: the manifests, certificates and surveys the charter requires.

Readiness is judged at the moment of tender. Something missing then cannot be cured by the ship becoming ready later, which is the point The Mexico 1 fixed in law (see below). The Massalia (No. 2) [1960] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 352 is the classic readiness case rather than an arrived-ship case: the ship had arrived at Colombo, but the contractual flour was overstowed with other cargo, so it was not ready to discharge the flour and the NOR tendered on arrival was premature.

Condition 3: Tender through the agreed channel and hours

The notice must reach the right party, by the right means, at the right time:

• Through the channel the charter prescribes, today usually email, sometimes telex on legacy forms.
• Addressed to the party named, the charterer, the agent, or both.
• Within any prescribed hours, often the office hours of the recipient.
• In writing; oral notice is generally not enough.

A NOR tendered outside prescribed hours is not thereby invalid. As The Petr Schmidt confirmed, it is simply deemed received when the office next opens, so a notice served at 1830 on Friday may take effect at the start of business on Monday. That is different from an invalid NOR, which has no effect at all and must be re-served.

WIBON, WIPON, WIFPON and WCCON

Standard forms soften the arrival and readiness rules with a family of risk-shifting clauses:

• WIBON, “whether in berth or not”, lets a berth-charter ship tender NOR from the usual waiting place when the berth is not available, shifting the congestion risk to the charterer.
• WIPON, “whether in port or not”, goes further, allowing tender from a customary waiting place outside the port limits.
• WIFPON, “whether in free pratique or not”, allows tender before free pratique is granted.
• WCCON, “whether customs cleared or not”, allows tender before customs clearance.

WIBON does less than it looks. In The Kyzikos [1989] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1 the House of Lords held that WIBON shifts only the risk that the berth is unavailable through congestion. Where a berth is free but the ship cannot reach it for another reason, fog at the Houston pilot station in that case, WIBON does not operate and the owner carries the delay. The clause answers the question “no berth available,” not “berth available but unreachable.”

A distinct clause, “reachable on arrival,” works the other way and is easily confused with WIBON. Where the charter says a berth must be reachable on arrival, the charterer warrants that a berth the ship can reach safely and without delay will be available when it arrives, and LAYTIMEDEFS 2013 records it as a charterer’s undertaking rather than a description of port conditions. If no such berth is there, the charterer is in breach and liable for the detention time, whether or not laytime has started. WIBON allocates the risk of waiting; “reachable on arrival” promises there will be nothing to wait for. A charter can carry both, and reading which one governs a given delay is a frequent source of argument.

Free pratique and customs

Free pratique, the health clearance that lets a ship land cargo and crew, sits awkwardly between formality and condition. The leading position, from Lord Denning in The Delian Spirit [1972] 1 QB 103, is that where pratique is a mere formality, with an apparently clean bill of health and no reason to expect delay, a valid NOR can be tendered and laytime can run before it is formally granted. Where pratique is genuinely in doubt, because of illness aboard or a prior call at an infected port, it is not a formality and a NOR tendered without it is premature.

Charter clauses then adjust the default. WIFPON puts the risk of pratique delay on the charterer. On the tanker side, Shellvoy 6 makes the original NOR invalid if free pratique or customs clearance is not obtained within six hours of tender, unless it is not customary to obtain pratique before berthing, a point litigated in Eagle Valencia. The safe practice is to tender, note in the NOR that pratique is pending as a formality and cite the WIFPON clause, and issue a letter of protest if a real delay then arises that is not the ship’s fault.

NOR validity checklist

Before signing, the master runs the validity test. The same checks drive the NOR validity check calculator:

1. Is the ship an arrived ship at the contractual point, within port limits for a port charter or at the berth for a berth charter, or is a WIBON or WIPON clause in play?
2. Are the holds or tanks clean to the cargo’s standard, with any independent inspection passed?
3. Is the ship’s gear, ballast condition and, for tankers, inert gas and pumps ready?
4. Is free pratique granted, or covered by WIFPON, or a genuine formality?
5. Is customs clearance obtained, or covered by WCCON?
6. Are the required certificates and documents on board and in order?
7. Is the notice going to the right party, by the agreed channel, within the agreed hours?

If any answer is no, the master should not tender. Tendering a NOR the master knows to be untrue risks an invalid notice and, worse, exposure on any cargo claim that follows from starting work before the ship was actually ready.

NOR drafting and a sample notice

A workable NOR identifies the ship and voyage, states arrival and readiness, references the charter, and is signed and acknowledged. The following is a generic template for reference only; no real ship or counterparty is intended.

NOTICE OF READINESS

To:     [Charterer or charterer's nominated agent]
From:   Master, M/V GENERIC TRADER, IMO No. 9000001
Date:   [DD Month YYYY]      Time: [HH:MM] local time
Place:  [Port], [anchorage / berth / terminal as applicable]

Charter Party: Voyage Charter Party dated [DD Month YYYY] between
[Owner / Disponent Owner] and [Charterer] for the carriage of
[cargo] from [load port] to [discharge port].

We hereby tender Notice of Readiness that the above vessel arrived at
[anchorage / pilot station / berth] at [HH:MM] on [DD Month YYYY] and
is in all respects ready to [load / discharge] the said cargo.

This Notice is tendered whether in berth or not, whether in port or not,
whether in free pratique or not, and whether customs cleared or not, as
provided in the Charter Party.

Please acknowledge receipt and confirm readiness to commence cargo
operations in accordance with the Charter Party.

Signed: ____________________   Master, M/V GENERIC TRADER
Received without prejudice: ____________________  Date/Time: ________

Two drafting points carry most of the disputes. Mirror the charter’s qualifying clauses word for word, because a mismatch between the NOR and the charter is itself a ground of challenge. And keep a timestamped record of transmission, the email send receipt or telex confirmation, since the time of receipt is what the office-hours rule and the laytime calculation both turn on.

The master’s and the agent’s roles

The master owns the readiness decision. Before signing, the master confirms the ship’s position against the chart and the port limits, walks the holds or checks the tank logs, verifies the ballast condition and the ship’s gear, and confirms the certificates are valid and aboard. If any element is short, the master holds the notice; the discipline is to tender only what is true, because a NOR the master knows to be premature is both invalid and a potential cargo-claim exposure if work starts before the ship is in fact ready.

The port agent supplies the local knowledge the master cannot carry. The agent confirms the customary tender practice and office hours at that port, identifies the right addressee, lodges the notice with the authorities where local rules require it, and arranges any inspection the cargo needs, the grain surveyor’s hold inspection or the chemical-tank wall wash. At complex ports such as Singapore, Rotterdam, Houston or Shanghai, that local practice can decide whether a notice is good, which is why owners lean on a competent agent rather than a generic template. The agent also receives and timestamps the charterer’s acknowledgement, the record that later anchors the laytime account.

Invalid NOR: the inchoate-notice rule

An invalid NOR is a nullity, not a notice waiting to mature. In The Mexico 1 [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 507 the Court of Appeal held that a NOR which is untrue when given, because the ship is not then ready, does not later spring into life automatically when the ship becomes ready. It is not an inchoate or delayed-action notice. If the first NOR was bad, a fresh and valid NOR has to be served, and laytime runs only from the new one. The cargo in that case was, as in The Massalia, inaccessible behind overstowed goods when the notice went in.

The consequence for owners is exact: silence by the charterer on receiving an invalid NOR is not acceptance, and the charterer can raise the invalidity months later when the demurrage claim arrives. The remedy is procedural, re-tender, and is covered below.

Waiver of an invalid NOR: The Happy Day and The Sebat

The hardest-edged exception to the nullity rule is waiver. In Glencore Grain v Flacker Shipping (The Happy Day) [2002] EWCA Civ 1068 the ship missed the tide and tendered NOR before it was an arrived ship, so the notice was invalid. Discharge nonetheless went ahead for weeks without the charterer ever rejecting the notice or asking for a fresh one. The Court of Appeal held that laytime had still commenced, because on those facts the charterer had waived reliance on the invalidity. Potter LJ set out a three-stage test: a notice valid in form was served, the ship then arrived and was or was treated as ready, and cargo operations began to the charterer’s order without rejection or a demand for a new notice.

The Happy Day is not a soft doctrine, and the most recent authority tightens it. In Trans Trade v Sebat [2026] EWHC 950 (Comm) the Commercial Court overturned an arbitral demurrage award of about USD 840,000 where the master had tendered NOR at the pilot station before the ship was an arrived ship and never tendered again. The court held that the mere start of cargo operations is not enough to constitute waiver; the charterer must have knowledge of the invalidity and its conduct must amount to an unequivocal election not to rely on it. There is no separate, lower-threshold doctrine of “deemed waiver.” The practical message for owners is unchanged and old-fashioned: do not rely on waiver, re-tender a clean NOR.

Readiness by ship type

Dry bulk

For bulk carriers, readiness turns on hold condition. Industry practice recognises a graded scale of hold cleanliness, though, as the clubs note, there is no single codified definition and the grade is ultimately a matter of the charter and the cargo:

• Hospital clean (or stripped to bare metal): the most demanding, intact coatings and no residue at all, for sensitive cargoes such as kaolin or mineral sands.
• Grain clean: swept, washed, dried and free of residue, infestation, loose scale and odour; the common standard, with light surface rust tolerated but loose scale not.
• Normal clean: swept and washed, ready for a similar or compatible cargo.
• Shovel clean: previous cargo removed mechanically, with residues a shovel can clear left at tank-top level.
• Load on top: new cargo loaded onto existing residues, only for a single continuous commodity.

For grain, an independent surveyor, the National Cargo Bureau in the United States or an equivalent, inspects the holds and issues a cleanliness certificate before loading. If the holds fail, the NOR is invalid until they pass and a fresh notice is tendered. The master should not tender NOR until the holds have passed.

Tanker

For chemical tankers and crude carriers, readiness means tanks clean to the agreed standard, the inert gas system working with oxygen typically held below 8 percent by volume for crude, and lines and pumps tested. Chemical parcels are verified by a wall-wash test, in which a surveyor checks wash-water samples for hydrocarbons, chlorides, the permanganate time test and colour; a tank that fails is not ready, and the NOR cannot validly cover it until it is accepted.

LNG carrier

For LNG carriers, readiness includes the cargo tanks being at the right condition for the operation, cooled down over several hours before a loading at full rate, a minimum liquid level for the custody-transfer gauging to read accurately, and the cargo containment, gas-detection and emergency systems certified and operational under the IGC Code. A ship that arrives “warm” when a “cool ship” was expected can face a readiness dispute.

Container ship

For container ships, NOR is rarely a live issue, since most container trades run on liner schedules rather than voyage charters.

Acceptance, rejection and re-tender

When the charterer or agent accepts a NOR, laytime runs from the time the charter fixes, and the charterer’s room to challenge validity later narrows. Some forms call for an express acknowledgement within a set time; others provide for deemed acceptance if the notice is not rejected within a set period.

A rejection should be in writing, identify the specific defect, and be sent within a reasonable time. Common grounds are that the ship had not in fact arrived, the holds or tanks were not clean, free pratique was genuinely outstanding without a WIFPON clause, the charter required berthing first with no WIBON, or the notice went in outside agreed hours. A charterer who receives a notice it doubts but does not want to commit on will often endorse it “received without prejudice to charterers’ rights,” which acknowledges receipt for the record while keeping the invalidity argument alive. That endorsement is the mirror image of the owner’s “without prejudice” re-tender, and a file full of both is the normal texture of a contested call.

The recurring dispute types are worth naming, because they recur at every demurrage desk: whether WIBON was properly invoked and whether the berth had in fact come free before tender; whether free pratique was a formality or a real barrier; whether the holds or tanks were actually clean when the notice went in, as against a later surveyor rejection; which office, which time zone and which local holidays the office-hours rule should read against; and whether an emailed notice satisfied a charter that named only telex or fax. Each of these is, at bottom, a factual question that the contemporaneous record decides.

Where a NOR is or may be invalid, the standard answer is to re-tender. The fresh notice is marked “without prejudice to the validity of the NOR tendered at [time and date],” which preserves the owner’s argument that the first notice was good while putting a clean one on record. In a port where the ship may wait days for a berth, owners often re-tender daily on that basis so at least one notice survives a challenge. The time spent rectifying a defect is generally for the owner’s account.

Standard charter forms

Most standard voyage forms carry detailed NOR and laytime provisions, and the clause numbers matter because practitioners cite them directly:

• GENCON 2022 (BIMCO), the first full revision of GENCON since 1994, puts Notice of Readiness in Clause 9, laytime in Clause 10, commencement of laytime in Clause 11 and the running of laytime in Clause 12. Clause 9 allows tender in writing at any time, lets multiple notices be served without prejudice, and provides WIBON, WIPON, WIFPON and WCCON tender where the berth is not reachable. Clause 10 incorporates the BIMCO Laytime Definitions 2013 by reference. The older GENCON 94 carried these in Clause 6, which is the source of a common misquotation.
• Asbatankvoy keeps NOR and laytime in Clause 6: on arrival at the customary anchorage the master gives notice “berth or no berth,” and laytime starts six hours after receipt or on the ship’s arrival in berth, whichever is first.
• Shellvoy 6 (2005), still the current Shell form, deals with NOR and running time in Clause 13, with the six-hour free-pratique and customs condition noted above.
• BPVOY5 (in force from 21 March 2016) carries NOR and laytime in Clauses 10 to 12, with commencement under Clause 10.4. The figure sometimes quoted as “Clause 17” does not correspond to the NOR provision.
• Synacomex 2023, approved by BIMCO in October 2023, is the current Continent grain form and supersedes Synacomex 2000.

The common reference standard behind these forms is the BIMCO Laytime Definitions for Charterparties 2013 (LAYTIMEDEFS 2013), produced jointly by BIMCO, the Baltic Exchange, the Comite Maritime International and FONASBA, which gives agreed definitions of “Notice of Readiness,” “laytime,” “demurrage,” “arrived ship” and the WIBON family. It remains the current edition.

Standard forms are then tailored in the recap. The common bespoke amendments cluster around the same pressure points: stacking “WIBON, WIPON, WIFPON, WCCON” together to give the owner the widest tender freedom; widening the tender window, for instance “office hours 0800 to 1800 Monday to Saturday inclusive”; naming a specific charterer email address as a valid channel to close off the email-validity argument; and deeming free pratique granted unless rejected within a set number of hours, which converts the common-law formality question into a contractual one. Each amendment moves a slice of risk between owner and charterer, and reading the recap against the printed form is part of vetting any NOR.

Worked example: when does laytime start?

Take a port charter on GENCON 2022, SHEX terms (Sundays and holidays excepted), no WIBON, laydays 10 to 15 June 2026.

The ship reaches the customary anchorage within the port at 1645 on Friday 12 June and the master tenders NOR by email at 1700. The holds were certified grain clean the day before, free pratique is a formality covered by a WIFPON clause, and the documents are in order, so the notice is valid when tendered.

GENCON 2022’s commencement rule then governs the start. A valid NOR received after noon on a working day starts laytime at 0800 the next working day. The next working day after Friday, with Saturday and Sunday excepted, is Monday. Laytime commences at 0800 on Monday 15 June 2026, and the weekend at anchor does not count.

Had the master managed to tender by noon on the Friday, laytime would have started at 1400 that same afternoon, putting a few hours of Friday on the clock before the weekend exclusion. The lesson for a Friday arrival is to tender at once even after noon, to lock in the Monday-morning start rather than lose the whole period. The arithmetic from there runs through the laytime calculator and, once the allowed time expires, the demurrage and despatch calculator.

Now change the fixture to a berth charter with a WIBON clause and suppose the berth is occupied when the ship arrives. WIBON lets the master tender from the anchorage, and laytime runs as if the ship were at the berth, so the congestion delay falls on the charterer. But suppose instead the berth is free and the ship is held off only by fog closing the pilot station. On those facts The Kyzikos says WIBON does not bite: the berth was available, the obstacle was navigational, and the waiting time stays with the owner. The same clause, the same port, two different causes of delay, and opposite results. That sensitivity to the precise cause of delay is why the contemporaneous record, the SOF, the pilot log, the port’s berth-availability record, decides most NOR disputes rather than the wording alone.

Disputes, the Statement of Facts and time bars

Most demurrage disputes are not arguments about the wording of the charter; they are arguments about what happened and when, and the document that records it is the Statement of Facts. Prepared by the agent and signed by the master and usually a terminal representative, the SOF timestamps every event from NOR tender through completion of cargo work, including every stoppage and its cause. An adverse SOF entry, one that records a delay as the ship’s own fault, can defeat a demurrage claim even where the NOR was sound, so the master reviews it carefully before signing and notes any disagreement. The Statement of Facts builder and the NOR tendering notice tool support that record.

NOR validity also decides which way the money flows at the fast end of the account. Where the charterer finishes within the allowed laytime, many dry-cargo charters pay the owner despatch, conventionally half the demurrage rate, for the time saved, and the saved time is measured from the same laytime start that the NOR fixes. A NOR that starts the clock late can turn a despatch credit into a demurrage debit on the same set of port events, which is why both sides scrutinise the tender as closely on a quick call as on a slow one. On the burden of proof, an owner claiming demurrage has to show a valid NOR and a clean laytime calculation; a charterer resisting it points to the defect in the notice or the gap in the owner’s documents, and the time bar does the rest if the file is late.

Two further traps sit beyond NOR validity. Most charters, GENCON 2022 among them, impose a demurrage time bar, often 90 days from completion, and a claim filed late with its supporting documents is forfeit however good the NOR. And in a charter chain the NOR is tested contract by contract: as The Alpha Harmony [2019] EWHC 2522 (Comm) showed, a notice valid under the head charter is not automatically valid under a sub-charter on different terms, for instance one carrying an office-hours restriction the head charter lacks.

Just-in-time arrival, virtual arrival and electronic NOR

Speed-optimisation schemes have grown up alongside the NOR regime without replacing it. The BIMCO Just in Time Arrival Clause for Voyage Charter Parties 2021 lets the charterer ask the owner to slow the ship to reach the port when a berth is actually available, with the owner’s consent not unreasonably withheld and separate compensation for the extra sea time. It governs the approach voyage only: once the ship arrives, NOR, arrived-ship status and laytime run under the underlying charter exactly as before, a gap the clause does not close. The earlier BIMCO Virtual Arrival Clause 2013 works on similar lines.

Electronic tender has overtaken practice without a dedicated rule. Most NORs in the dry-bulk and tanker trades already go by email, but the legal risk is the charter form: under a closed list of permitted channels that predates email, an emailed NOR can be invalid, as Trafigura v Ravennavi (The Port Russel) [2013] EWHC 490 (Comm) held under a BPVOY3 clause listing letter, fax, telegram, telex, radio and telephone but not email. Modern forms answer this with open wording or express electronic terms, and the BIMCO Port Call Data Exchange Clause 2021 builds the timestamp infrastructure that a fully digital NOR workflow would need.

Limitations

This article states the general English-law position, which most international charters adopt by an express choice-of-law clause, but it is not legal advice and the answer in any case turns on the specific charter wording and the facts at the moment of tender. The case law moves: The Happy Day three-stage test and its 2026 restatement in The Sebat are the current frame for waiver, but a single first-instance decision can shift the detail. Clause numbers are edition-specific, the GENCON 2022 numbering differs from GENCON 94, and forms are revised, so a live fixture should always be read against the actual charter in hand rather than a general description. Port practice on office hours, free pratique and hold or tank inspection varies widely, and the local agent’s knowledge is part of getting a NOR right.

Leading cases and authorities

• The Johanna Oldendorff [1974] AC 479 (HL): the Reid test for an arrived ship under a port charter.
• The Maratha Envoy [1978] AC 1 (HL): the usual waiting place must be within port limits.
• The Kyzikos [1989] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1 (HL): WIBON applies to congestion, not to a berth made unreachable by weather.
• The Mexico 1 [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 507 (CA): an invalid NOR is a nullity and does not later become valid on its own.
• The Happy Day [2002] EWCA Civ 1068 (CA): waiver of an invalid NOR once cargo operations begin without rejection.
• The Front Commander [2006] EWCA Civ 944 (CA): a charter clause can allow early NOR where the charterer consents, and consent may lie in the charterer’s own instructions.
• The Delian Spirit [1972] 1 QB 103 (CA): free pratique as a formality does not prevent a valid NOR.
• Trans Trade v Sebat [2026] EWHC 950 (Comm): waiver needs the charterer’s knowledge and an unequivocal election, not just the start of discharge.
• BIMCO Laytime Definitions for Charterparties 2013; GENCON 2022; Asbatankvoy; Shellvoy 6; BPVOY5; Synacomex 2023.
• Schofield, Laytime and Demurrage, 8th edition, Informa Law, 2021; Cooke and others, Voyage Charters, 5th edition, Informa Law, 2022.

See also

Calculators

• NOR validity check
• Laytime - NOR tendering notice
• Laytime calculator
• Demurrage and despatch calculator
• Statement of Facts builder
• Port stay fuel and CO2

Related wiki articles

• Laytime
• Demurrage
• Statement of Facts
• Reversible laytime and despatch
• Voyage charter party
• Bill of lading
• Just-in-time arrival