slow decline, the New York Produce Exchange disbanded in the late 1960s or early
1970s,
25 but the standard form that bears its name lives on 50 years later. The
original NYPE form has been revised six times, in 1921, 1931, 1946, 1981, 1993,
and most recently in 2015. Responsibility for the 1981 and 1993 versions was
assumed by the Association of Ship Brokers and Agents (U.S.A.) Inc. (ASBA),
which took over the copyright when the New York Produce Exchange ceased to
exist. Although ASBA called the 1981 version, somewhat optimistically,
“ASBATime,” the 1993 version reverted to the more recognizable name “NYPE
93.” The 1981 version also discreetly dropped the enigmatic caption that had
appeared in the earlier versions—“Government Form”—perhaps because it was
never clear which government had said what about the form. The most recent
version, NYPE 2015, reflects a much more broadly international basis of input:
ASBA was joined by joint authors the Baltic and International Maritime Council
(BIMCO) and the Singapore Maritime Foundation (SMF).
26
NYPE 2015 is a fine piece of work, well drafted, with clauses specifically
addressing many issues that have arisen in the recent practice of ship operations,
such as the impact of the International Safety Management Code (the ISM Code),
27
the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code of 2004 (the ISPS Code),
28 the
effect of ballast water exchange regulations,
29 the need to make provision for slow
steaming at charterer’s request,
30 and many others. It is, truly, an all-purpose time
charter form for the twenty-first century. Unfortunately, however, time-chartering
practice seems to be wedded to legal provisions dating from the mid-twentieth
century or even long earlier. It is still the 1946 version of the NYPE form that is
most widely used in practice, even though it makes no provision for any of the
matters noted above.
In the 10 years from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2018, there were 49 cases
reported in the Lloyd’s Reports about time charters on the New York Produce
Exchange form. In 21 of those 49 cases, the charterparty in dispute was specifically
identified as being a modified version of the 1946 form. Only six of the cases
featured the 1993 version of the form; none at all featured the 1981 version of the
form, and none (as yet) featured the 2015 version of the form. In 22 of the cases, it
was unclear which version of the form was being used by the parties in dispute, as
the report simply described the contract as being on “the New York Produce
Exchange form,” or words to that effect. It is a fairly safe bet that many, if not all,
of those 22 cases in which the version of the form was not identified were actually
concerned with the 1946 version, which is still widely regarded as the NYPE form.
25 Id.
26 BIMCO (2016), p. 3.
27 NYPE 2015, cl. 44.
28 NYPE 2015, cl. 45.
29 NYPE 2015, cl. 51.
30 NYPE 2015, cl. 38.
158
M. Davies
1970s,
25 but the standard form that bears its name lives on 50 years later. The
original NYPE form has been revised six times, in 1921, 1931, 1946, 1981, 1993,
and most recently in 2015. Responsibility for the 1981 and 1993 versions was
assumed by the Association of Ship Brokers and Agents (U.S.A.) Inc. (ASBA),
which took over the copyright when the New York Produce Exchange ceased to
exist. Although ASBA called the 1981 version, somewhat optimistically,
“ASBATime,” the 1993 version reverted to the more recognizable name “NYPE
93.” The 1981 version also discreetly dropped the enigmatic caption that had
appeared in the earlier versions—“Government Form”—perhaps because it was
never clear which government had said what about the form. The most recent
version, NYPE 2015, reflects a much more broadly international basis of input:
ASBA was joined by joint authors the Baltic and International Maritime Council
(BIMCO) and the Singapore Maritime Foundation (SMF).
26
NYPE 2015 is a fine piece of work, well drafted, with clauses specifically
addressing many issues that have arisen in the recent practice of ship operations,
such as the impact of the International Safety Management Code (the ISM Code),
27
the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code of 2004 (the ISPS Code),
28 the
effect of ballast water exchange regulations,
29 the need to make provision for slow
steaming at charterer’s request,
30 and many others. It is, truly, an all-purpose time
charter form for the twenty-first century. Unfortunately, however, time-chartering
practice seems to be wedded to legal provisions dating from the mid-twentieth
century or even long earlier. It is still the 1946 version of the NYPE form that is
most widely used in practice, even though it makes no provision for any of the
matters noted above.
In the 10 years from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2018, there were 49 cases
reported in the Lloyd’s Reports about time charters on the New York Produce
Exchange form. In 21 of those 49 cases, the charterparty in dispute was specifically
identified as being a modified version of the 1946 form. Only six of the cases
featured the 1993 version of the form; none at all featured the 1981 version of the
form, and none (as yet) featured the 2015 version of the form. In 22 of the cases, it
was unclear which version of the form was being used by the parties in dispute, as
the report simply described the contract as being on “the New York Produce
Exchange form,” or words to that effect. It is a fairly safe bet that many, if not all,
of those 22 cases in which the version of the form was not identified were actually
concerned with the 1946 version, which is still widely regarded as the NYPE form.
25 Id.
26 BIMCO (2016), p. 3.
27 NYPE 2015, cl. 44.
28 NYPE 2015, cl. 45.
29 NYPE 2015, cl. 51.
30 NYPE 2015, cl. 38.
158
M. Davies