วารสารวิชาการนิติศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยทักษิณ

1946 has been used for several decades, causing a number of disputes regarding the clear explanation of the terms in NYPE 1946, as well as jurisprudence confirmation in most of the term wording. Unlike NYPE 1946, the dispute under NYPE 1993 has two cases outstanding, which are Spar Shipping AS v Grand China Logistics Holding (Group) Co. Ltd 4 where Popplewell J clarified the delayed payment of hire as the breach of the innominate term, and CONWARTIME 2004, applied to routeing in The Paiwan Wisdom 5 in the face of fears about piracy. Accordingly, NYPE 1993 has occasionally been used, although only for a few cases in recent years 6 such in The Socol 3. 7 Furthermore, one of the biggest problems with NYPE 1993 is that the shipowner and the charterer have added regularly to the rider clauses. 8 From these issues, the latest version of NYPE was issued jointly by ASBA, BIMCO and SMF in 2015. The main factor of this revision procedure was “the opportunity to enhance the global appeal of NYPE”. 9 BIMCO, ASBA and SMF 4  [2015] EWHC 718 (Comm), [2015] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 407 5  Taokas Navigation SA v Komrowski Bulk Shipping KG (GmbH & Co) and others (The Paiwan Wisdom) [2012] EWHC 1888 (Comm) 6  Paul Todd, ‘NYPE 2015: Wholesale reform or an invitation to cherry-pick?’ (2016) LMCLQ 307 7  Onego Shipping & Chartering BV v JSC Arcadia Shipping (The Socol 3) [2010] EWHC 777 (Comm) 8  BIMCO, ‘Major revision of NYPE time charter party’ (BIMCO, 15 October 2015) <https://www.bimco.org/en/News/2015/10/15_NYPE_revision_press.aspx> accessed 11 August 2016 9  BIMCO, ‘BIMCO Reflections - 2016’ (BIMCO, 2015) <https://www.bimco.org/emag /Reflections_ 2016/pubData/source/Reflections%202016%20-%20Web.pdf> accessed 11 August 2016 วารสารวิชาการนิติศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยทักษิณ ปีที่ 6 ฉบับที่ 8 กรกฎาคม 2560 - มิถุนายน 2561 119