(编者按：续我司微信公众号7月25日文章《金康2022系列之一：Scope of Contract Voyage》，编者现对船东责任条款进行解析，与君共勉。)

金康76第二条：

2.  Owners’ Responsibility Clause

Owners are to be responsible for loss of or damage to the goods or for delay in delivery of the goods only in case the loss, damage or delay has been caused by the improper or negligent stowage of the goods (unless stowage performed by shippers/Charterers or their stevedores or servants) or by personal want of due diligence on the part of the owners or their Manager to make the vessel in all respects seaworthy and to secure that she is properly manned, equipped and supplied or by the personal act or default of the Owners or their Manager.

And the owners are responsible for no loss or damage or delay arising from any other cause whatsoever, even from the neglect or default of the Captain or crew or some other person employed by the owners on board or ashore for whose acts they would, but for this clause, be responsible, or from unseaworthiness of the vessel on loading or commencement of the voyage or at any time whatsoever. Damage caused by contact with or leakage, smell or evaporation from other goods or by the inflammable or explosive nature or insufficient package of other goods not to be considered as caused by improper or negligent stowage, even if in fact so caused. 

金康94第二条：

2.  Owners’ Responsibility Clause

The owners are to be responsible for loss of or damage to the goods or for delay in delivery of the goods only in case the loss, damage or delay has been caused by personal want of due diligence on the part of the owners or their manager to make the vessel in all respects seaworthy and to secure that she is properly manned, equipped and supplied, or by the personal act or default of the owners or their Manager. And the Owners are not responsible for loss, damage or delay arising from any other cause whatsoever, even from the neglect or default of the Master or crew or some other person employed by the owners on board or ashore for whose acts they would, but for this clause, be responsible, or from unseaworthiness of the vessel on loading or commencement of the voyage or at any time whatsoever. 

金康2022第二条：

2.  Owners' Responsibilities

Subject to any risks or responsibilities that the Charterers have assumed under this Charter Party,

a.(i) the Owners shall exercise due diligence to provide a Vessel that shall:

(1)at the commencement of loading Cargo at each loading port or place under this Charter Party be properly manned, equipped and supplied for its loading and have holds, refrigerating and cool chambers and all other parts of the Vessel in which such Cargo is to be carried fit and safe for its reception, carriage and preservation; and

(2)at the commencement of each Cargo-carrying voyage be seaworthy and properly manned, equipped and supplied; and

(ii) the Owners shall, from the time when it is loaded to the time when it is discharged, properly and carefully carry, keep and care for the Cargo.

b.The Owners shall be entitled to rely on all rights, defences, immunities, time bars and limitations of liability that are available in any event to a "Carrier" under the Hague-Visby Rules. Furthermore, unless the loss, damage, delay or failure in performance in question has been caused by a breach of subclause (a)(i) above, the Owners shall also be entitled to rely on all other rights, defences, immunities, time bars and limitations of liability that are available to a “Carrier” under the Hague-Visby Rules.

All such rights, defences, immunities, time bars and limitations of liability are deemed to be applicable to any claim that may be made against the Owners or the ship for loss, damage, delay or failure in performance of whatsoever nature.

本条是船东责任条款，也是最重要的船东免责条款。金康94该条款饱受船东和租家两方诟病，此次修订进行了重大修改。

对船东来说，由于金康94该条款免责范围过于广泛，法院通常对这样的免责条款会有敌意，不一定能起到保护船东的效果。这方面的争议主要是指The “Dominator” (1959) 1 Lloyd’s Rep.125 先例。

在该先例中，租约双方实际上是采用了金康76该条款内容，只是把第二段最后一句话删除了。Diplock大法官认为在解释该条款第二段时，其到底是有广泛意思还是只能去免除货物相关责任，应去参照删除部分的内容。Diplock大法官说：

“As I say, there is ambiguity, and I am accordingly going to look at the deleted paragraph to see if it throws any light upon that ambiguity. The deleted paragraph was in these terms: “Damage caused by contact with or leakage, smell or evaporation from other goods or by the inflammable or explosive nature or insufficient package of other goods not to be considered as caused. This deals plainly, and deals only, with damage to the goods. It is an exception to the first paragraph of the clause. I see, therefore, that in its printed form… Paragraph 2 is sandwiched between two paragraphs plainly dealing only with loss of, damage to, or delay in delivery of the goods…”

Diplock大法官认为第二段的“损失、损坏与延误”前后部分均是针对货物，而同一条款中所用的词语（如“损失”，“延误”）应尽量给予同义解释，因此第二段的本意也只能是去针对货物方面的“损失、损坏及延误”，而不会包括其他方面的损失，比如短装货等。所以因船东违约造成租家除货物损失、损坏与延误外的其他经济损失，船东是不能依赖该条款免责的。受此先例的影响，金康94该条款的改动是完全删除了金康76该条款的最后一句，使得删掉的这句话从来没有出现过，看似没有局限前面那句免责条款的意思。但由于没有针对此处改动的先例，其改动效果未得到验证。而本次修订直接明确了本条款可适用于任何性质的损失，杜绝了本条款解释的不稳定。

对租家来说，金康94该条款过于保护船东。船东只承担船东本人或经理人本人的行为或错误引起以及没有尽到“本人应尽的恪尽职责”使船舶适航而造成的货物损失、损坏及延误，而对其他任何情况下的任何性质的损失、损坏及延误不负责，大大超出了《海牙-维斯比规则》第四条第二款下的船东免责范围。为了无损租家责任险的效力，租家通常会要求在租约中并入《海牙-维斯比规则》。

此次修订并未直接并入《海牙-维斯比规则》，而是参照《海牙-维斯比规则》在(a)条款中规定船东“在各装货港或装货地开始装货时”提供适航船舶和“在各载货航次开始时”谨慎合理地照料货物的义务，同时在（b）条款中规定船东可以享受《海牙-维斯比规则》下的各种权利、抗辩、免责、时效和责任限制。

尽管船东失去了名义上广泛的免责保护，但是带来了如下好处：

1.可以享受《海牙-维斯比规则》第四条第二款下的列明的免责和1年诉讼时效的权利。需要注意的是，对于租约纠纷，租家对船东的诉讼时效是1年，而船东对租家的诉讼时效仍然是普通法规定的6年。从策略上讲，船东可以等待一年后向租家提出索赔，来打掉租家的反诉。

2.船东谨慎处理的适航义务只在“每次货物装载开始时”和“每次载货航次开始时”，比《海牙-维斯比规则》的规定“开航前和开航时”更窄，实际上减轻了船东的负担。

从以上分析可以看出，金康2022第二条平衡了租约当事双方的权利义务关系，更符合实际商业需求。

参考文献：

1.杨良宜《程租合约》

2.初北平 裘静宜《金康2022修订内容及其实践影响》

3. Julien Rabeux《The new GENCON 2022 charterparty》
转自：诺亚天泽保险经纪
阅读原文