今年2月,英国上诉法院在“Bijela”轮一案中,就有关临时修理费用能否列入共同海损的争议,作出与以往习惯解释不同的判决,从而引起航运界的广泛关注。在该判决中,法官维持了商事法庭法官对1974年约克-安特卫普规则“文字上的逻辑解释”,从而得出结论:尽管该轮因临时修理而提前完成航程并节省了开支,但其费用不得列入共同海损。由此人们可以进一步推论,规则十四第二款几乎是一句废话。 In February this year, in the “Bijela” case, the British Court of Appeal raised controversial issues concerning whether general repairs could be included in the general average and made judgments different from past customary interpretations, causing widespread concern in the shipping industry. In that judgment, the judge upheld the commercial interpretation by the Commercial Court judge of the 1974 York-Antwerp code, "concluding that although the round completed the voyage ahead of schedule and saved money due to the interim repairs, the cost was not Included in the general average. From this it can be further deduced that the second paragraph of Rule XIV is almost a nonsense.