Time Lost Waiting for Berth

What it does

A time lost waiting for berth clause provides that time spent waiting for a berth to become free counts as laytime or as time on demurrage, even though the vessel has not yet berthed and could not tender a conventional notice of readiness. It is designed to bridge the gap, under a berth charter in particular, between the ship arriving at the port and actually getting alongside the quay.

Without such wording, a vessel under a berth charter often cannot start laytime until it reaches the berth, so congestion that keeps it waiting at anchor falls on the owner. The clause shifts that waiting time onto the charterer by treating it as if laytime were running, regardless of whether the ship has reached the point from which it would otherwise tender its notice of readiness.

Commercial effect

The clause reallocates the cost of port congestion from owner to charterer. Where berths are scarce and queues are long, the time a vessel spends waiting can be considerable, and whether it counts is a major commercial question. By counting waiting time, the clause protects the owner from bearing congestion delay that the charterer, through its choice of port or berth, is often better placed to manage.

For the charterer the clause increases exposure, because waiting time it might otherwise have avoided now consumes laytime or runs as demurrage. The presence and the precise wording of such a clause can therefore swing a significant sum on a congested call, which is why it is negotiated carefully and read together with the charter type and the notice provisions.

Owner's perspective

The owner seeks a time lost waiting for berth clause whenever congestion is a realistic risk, because under a plain berth charter the owner would otherwise absorb the waiting time. The clause ensures the vessel earns, through laytime or demurrage, while it sits in the queue, aligning the cost of delay with the party that selected the port in the first place.

The owner wants the wording broad enough to capture all the waiting time until a berth is available, without gaps the charterer could exploit. It also wants the clause to dovetail cleanly with the notice and laytime provisions so that counting is continuous from arrival, rather than leaving an unpaid interval between the waiting period and the moment the ship finally berths.

Charterer's perspective

The charterer resists or narrows the clause, since it transfers congestion risk that the charterer may regard as part of the owner's trade. Where it must accept the clause, the charterer looks to limit it, for instance by excluding waiting caused by matters within the owner's control or by tying the counting to conditions it can actually influence at the port.

The charterer also weighs the clause against its choice of port and berth and against its sale or sub-charter terms, because waiting time charged under the charter may not be recoverable downstream. Clear drafting on when waiting time starts and stops protects the charterer from open-ended exposure during a spell of prolonged congestion it could not have foreseen.

Negotiation points

• Whether waiting time counts at all when no berth is available, and from what moment it starts.
• Whether the clause counts the time as laytime or directly as time on demurrage.
• Whether waiting caused by the owner or the vessel is excluded from the count.
• How the clause interacts with the charter type (berth or port) and the notice of readiness provisions.

Common variations

• Time lost waiting for berth to count as laytime, with the usual exceptions applying.
• Time lost waiting for berth to count as time on demurrage, counting continuously.
• A clause confined to congestion not attributable to the owner or the vessel.
• Whether in berth or not wording achieving a similar effect through the notice provisions.