Bottomry - определение. Что такое Bottomry
Diclib.com
Словарь ChatGPT
Введите слово или словосочетание на любом языке 👆
Язык:

Перевод и анализ слов искусственным интеллектом ChatGPT

На этой странице Вы можете получить подробный анализ слова или словосочетания, произведенный с помощью лучшей на сегодняшний день технологии искусственного интеллекта:

  • как употребляется слово
  • частота употребления
  • используется оно чаще в устной или письменной речи
  • варианты перевода слова
  • примеры употребления (несколько фраз с переводом)
  • этимология

Что (кто) такое Bottomry - определение

ARRANGEMENT IN WHICH THE MASTER OF A SHIP BORROWS MONEY USING THE SHIP AS COLLATERAL
Bottomage; Respondentia; Bottomery

Bottomry         
·noun A contract in the nature of a mortgage, by which the owner of a ship, or the master as his agent, hypothecates and binds the ship (and sometimes the accruing freight) as security for the repayment of money advanced or lent for the use of the ship, if she terminates her voyage successfully. If the ship is lost by perils of the sea, the lender loses the money; but if the ship arrives safe, he is to receive the money lent, with the interest or premium stipulated, although it may, and usually does, exceed the legal rate of interest. ·see Hypothecation.
bottomry         
n. a mortgage contract in which a ship and/or its freight is pledged as security for a loan for equipment, repair, or use of a vessel. The contract is generally called a "bottomry bond." If the loan is not paid back, the lender can sell the ship and/or its freight.
bottomry         
¦ noun dated a system of merchant insurance in which a ship is used as security against a loan to finance a voyage.
Origin
C16: from bottom (in the sense 'ship') + -ry.

Википедия

Bottomry

A bottomry, or bottomage, is an arrangement in which the master of a ship borrows money upon the bottom or keel of it, so as to forfeit the ship itself to the creditor, if the money with interest is not paid at the time appointed at the ship's safe return.

This occurs, for example, where the ship needs urgent repairs during the course of its voyage or some other emergency arises and it is not possible for the master to contact the owner to arrange funds, allowing the master to borrow money on the security of the ship or the cargo by executing a bond. Where the ship is hypothecated, the bond is called a bottomry bond. Where both the ship and its cargo are hypothecated, the relationship is called respondentia. Due to the bottomry bond's relatively low priority as against other liens in the event of a libel against the ship, the use of bottomry bonds declined greatly in the 19th century and the subject is today of interest only to legal historians.

The Code of Hammurabi describes a form of bottomry which is a risk transferring technique. A bottomry would be taken, but the repayment would be contingent on the ship successfully completing the voyage. This is more like a catastrophe bond than traditional insurance. In traditional insurance, you pay premiums and receive a benefit on the risk event. With bottomry and catastrophe bonds, you receive a loan up front and only pay it back with a premium if the risk event doesn't occur.

In his Life of Cato the Elder, Plutarch describes how he would use the process to make money, but calls it "the most disreputable form of money-lending". Kaplan and Kaplan describe it as follows:

Ship insurance springs naturally from the necessity of trade, the existence of sophisticated entrepots, and the rapacity of barbarians – all long-familiar facts of life on the Mediterranean. Its ancient Greek form, as described by Demosthenes, was what is now called by the splendid name of "bottomry". It was not a direct transfer of risk, but rather a conditional loan: The insurer staked the merchant to a sum of money in advance of the voyage, which was to be repaid with (considerable) interest if the voyage succeeded – but forgiven if the vessel was lost. It is an arrangement that is easy to describe but difficult to characterize: not a pure loan, because the lender accepts part of the risk; not a partnership, because the money to be repaid is specified; not pure insurance, because it does not specifically secure the risk to the merchant's goods. It is perhaps best considered as a futures contract: the insurer has bought an option on the venture's final value.