국제물품매매계약상 정박기간에 관한 최근 분쟁사례연구

A Recent Case Study on Laytime Disputes under Contracts for International Sale of Goods

정박기간이란 선주가 화물의 선적과 양륙을 위해 용선자에게 부여한 시간을 말하며, 이는 항해용선계약서상 정박기간조항에서 구체화된다. 그런데 선주와 항해용선계약을 체결한 용선자는 국제물품매매계약상 상대방으로 하여금 항해용선계약상 정박기간 이내에 하역작업을 종료하게 할 목적에서 또는 자신이 선주에게 지급한 체선료를 상대방에게 청구할 목적에서 매매계약서에도 별도의 정박기간조항을 규정하게 된다. 이러한 매매계약서상 정박기간조항은 항해용선계약상 정박기간조항과 법률상 완전히 독립된 것이기 때문에 정박기간과 관련한 분쟁이 발생한 경우 그 해석상 각별한 주의가 요구된다. 본 논문은 최근 영국법원과 싱가포르법원에서 다루어진 국제물품매매계약상 정박기간이 쟁점이 된 Hang Ta호(2011) 사건, Crudesky호(2013) 사건, Athens호(2013) 사건, Team Anmaj호(2011) 사건 등을 분석하고, 그 실무적 시사점을 제시한다.

Purpose : A voyage charter-party normally contains a laytime clause. Meanwhile, the voyage charterer encourages the other party under a sales contract to fulfill its loading or discharge obligations under a voyage charter-party. This is achieved by inserting the laytime clause into the sales contract. The purpose of this article is to examine the recent four legal cases including The Hang Ta(2011), The Team Anmaj(2011), The Crudesky(2013) in U.K. and The Athens(2013) in Singapore regarding to laytime disputes under a contracts for international sale of goods, and to suggest practical implications in the concluding part of this paper. Research design, data, methodology : This paper uses the case study method with the literature research as to laytime under a voyage charter-party as well as under a contracts for international sale of goods. Results : The results of the analysis of recent cases indicates that the courts in U.K. and Singapore adopted some different approaches from the cases in voyage charterparty, because the laytime clause in a sales contract stands free and independent from the counterpart in the relevant voyage charter-party. Conclusions : This paper highlights that the interpretation of the laytime clause in the sales contract has attracted much attention, and suggests that the clear wording in a sales contract must be included in order to prevent legal disputes.