Defence Guide 11 May, 2022 Defence Guide - Interruptions and exceptions to laytime in a nutshell Julien Rabeux Head of Claims (Singapore) 1. Difference between Interruptions and exceptions to laytime An interruption to laytime covers a period when time does not count because it is outside the definition of laytime as expressed in the laytime clause. A common example is “Weather Working Day” (WWD) laytime period.  An exception to laytime, refers to a period that is within the definition of laytime, but is excluded by an exceptions’ clause. The principal difference between the two is that with an exception to laytime it is necessary to show a causal connection between what is excepted and the failure to work cargo, whereas with an interruption to laytime all that needs be shown for causation is that the excluded state of affairs exists at the place where cargo would have been worked.  For example: Ship A has a port charter with an interruption to laytime expressed in “Weather Working Days” Ship B has a similar charter but with laytime expressed in working days and additional clause excluding time lost due to adverse weather If both are waiting at anchorage for a berth, for ship A, rainy periods on working days will be excluded from laytime, but not in the case of ship B. This is because the rain did not delay the cargo operations 2. Interruptions to laytime: There are numerous interruptions to laytime. The most common are Weather Working Days and Sunday and Holidays excepted. a. Weather Working Days The meaning of the word “weather” is to be determined as a question of fact. What might constitute bad weather for one vessel will not necessarily be the same for another, even though both are in the same port at the same time. A period of rain may well prevent the discharge of a cargo of rice, but not a cargo of crude oil. Weather days: Is the Statement of Fact (SOF) binding? The SOF usually record the weather conditions in the port and is prepared by the agent.