ABSTRACT
I would agree it as open to question whether the charterers were entitled to give those orders, either in the literal sense or with the addition of the arbitrators’ interpretation.8 The charter-party certainly contemplates that the charter-party [this should probably read ‘‘charterers’’] may give some orders, such as the nomination of loading and discharging ports, the quantity of cargo, and whether it shall comprise one or two grades of oil. There is also an express term (Scanport cl. 6) allowing the charterers to divert the vessel during the voyage-at their expense. No doubt on many occasions a shipowner will be prepared to acquiesce in an order which the charterer could not otherwise insist upon, provided that the shipowner is recompensed. But this was a voyage charter-party not a time charter. The owners contracted for a voyage that was more or less defined in return for the freight specified. I can think of quite a number of reasons why in other circumstances they might not have wished to accept the charterers’ orders-delay to their next engagement, for example, or imminent bad weather on the voyage, war or political interference.
