After completing its work with the first edition of the “Intertankvoy” charter-party in 1971, it was only natural for Intertanko to raise the question whether there was not a similar need for a new time charter form. A group was formed to look into this question. It was agreed that the trade had managed with the existing forms for a long time, which of course might indicate that the need for a new charter was not a sine qua non. However, the fact that the trade had managed for many decades with the existing forms might not in itself be sufficient proof that a new form, so to speak a new look, might not be an advantage for the trade. With this modest approach one went to work, to study the various charter-party forms, still with the possibility that if the existing forms were found satisfactory, there was no need to make life even more complicated by introducing a new charter-party form.

Gradually, however, it was acknowledged that it would be difficult to change such clauses as were felt not to be reasonable, through mere recommendations from Intertanko. Therefore it was considered that the tanker industry would be served best by a completely new document.

Having decided on the desirability of creating a new separate time charter form, a drafting group was set up. This was instituted in 1973 and consisted of the writer of this article as chairman; Mr. John Weale, of Messrs. Bibby Bros & Co.; Mr. Per Lauridsen, of Messrs. A. P. Møller; and Mr. Trygve Meyer, of Intertanko, as secretary. It was decided to use the “Shelltime 3” form (amended 1972) as a basis for the work, being then the most recently up-dated charter-party form, and also one which was considered to be the most balanced of the existing forms.

A major reason for introducing a new form was the feeling in the trade on the owners’ side that the performance clauses in the existing forms had gone too far in the charterers’ favour. There has, of course, been a long development during which the owners’ obligations had been constantly tightened both by putting more risks openly upon the owners, and by “clarifying” the division between owners and charterers, which brought about the same result.

The most important aspect was the fact that more or less all existing tanker charter-parties have put upon the owners the risk that the vessel is able to keep the promised average speed in all kinds of weather. This, of course, is completely different from the speed description in the dry cargo charter-party forms. Many owners have felt this to be unjust, because a promise regarding an average speed is strictly speaking not a promise about the vessel itself, but rather an undertaking whereby the owners take upon themselves a trade risk over which owners may have little, if any, control. At the outset, therefore, the drafting group decided to modify the performance clauses, and relate the vessel’s speed to “moderate weather,” rather than to all kinds of weather.

On working further with the question, however, one met with practical difficulties as to how claims should be calculated under moderate weather clauses. Not only had previous experience shown that there were innumerable ways of calculating