LAW

HAGUE, HAGUE VISBY, HAMBURG RULES

QUESTIONS ASKED:
1. DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN HAGUE, HAGUE VISBY RULES? (NOV 08, JAN 09)
2. WRT HAGUE VISBY RULES, DISCUSS THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF ARTICLE II-RISKS, ARTICLE IV-
RESPONSIBILITIES AND LIABILITIES. (JUL 09, NOV 09, FEB 10) (5,15 MARKS)
3. WRITE SHORT NOTES ON:
1. EVOLUTION OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT (COGSA) OVER THE YEARS.(5 MARKS)
2. DUE DILIGENCE BY SHIP OWNER WRT SEAWORTHINESS UNDER ARTICLE III OF COGSA
(HAGUE VISBY RULES 1968) (JUL 09) (5 MARKS)

HAGUE RULES HAGUE VISBY RULES

1 THE RULES SHALL HAVE EFFECT AND NOT
FORCE OF LAW
2 CARRIER’S RESPONSIBILITY – 100 POUNDS
PER PACKAGE OR UNIT.
3 THE CARRIER IS DISCHARGED FROM ALL
LIABILITIES IF THERE IS NO ACTION WITHIN 1
YEAR FROM THE DATE OF DELIVERY OF THE
GOODS OR THE DATE WHEN THEY SHOULD
HAVE BEEN DELIVERED.
4 CONSIGNEE CAN FILE SUIT ONLY FOR LOSS
OR DAMAGE TO THE GOODS.
5 NO SUCH PROVISION.
6 APPLY ONLY TO OUTWARD B/L.
7 NO SUCH REFERENCE.
THE RULES ARE FORCE OF LAW
CARRIER’S RESPONSIBILITY 666.67 SDR OR 2
SDR PER KG OF GROSS WEIGHT OF GOODS
LOST OR DAMAGED, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER.
THE PERIOD OF 1 YEAR MAY BE EXTENDED IF
THE PARTIES SO AGREE AFTER THE CAUSE
OF ACTION HAVE ARISEN.
CONSIGNEE CAN NOT ONLY FILE A SUIT FOR
LOSS OR DAMAGE TO THE GOODS BUT ALSO
FOR WRONG DELIVERY.
WHEN GOODS ARE TRANSHIPPED BY 2
CARRIERS AND IF THE 2ND CARRIER HAS TO
PAY A CLAIM FOR LOSS OR DAMAGE TO
CARGO WHILE THE CARGO WAS IN CUSTODY
OF THE ORIGINAL CARRIER, THE RULES GIVE
3 MONTHS EXTENSION FROM THE TIME
WHEN THE OTHER CARRIER PAYS THE CLAIM
IN WHICH TO PURSUE HIS RIGHT OF
INDEMNITY AGAINST THE ORIGINAL
CARRIER.
APPLY TO EVERY B/L, IF THE B/L IS ISSUED IN
A STATE OR CARRIAGE IS FROM A PORT IN A
CONTRACTING STATE. OR THE B/L PROVIDES
THAT HAGUE VISBY RULES ARE TO GOVERN
THE CONTRACT.
SERVANT OR AGENTS OF THE CARRIER IS
ENTITLED TO SAME DEFENCES AND LIMITS
OF LIABILITY WHICH THE CARRIER IS LIABLE
TO INVOKE UNDER THESE RULES.

ARTICLE II – RISKS
SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE VI OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA THE CARRIER, IN
RELATION TO LOADING, HANDLING, STOWAGE, CARRIAGE, CUSTODY, CARE AND DISCHARGE OF
SUCH GOODS, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND LIABILITIES AND ENTITLED TO
THE RIGHTS AND IMMUNITIES SET HORTH HEREIN.

ARTICLE III – SHIPOWNERS RESPONSIBILIES AND LIABILITIES

1. TO EXERCISE DUE DILIGENCE AND CARE TO MAKE THE SHIP SEAWORTHY, PROPERLY MANNED,
EQUIPPED AND SUPPLY THE SHIP TO MAKE IT CARGO WORTHY,
2. TO MAKE THE HOLDS, REFRIGERATION AND COOL CHAMBERS, AND ALL OTHER PARTS OF THE
SHIP IN WHICH GOODS ARE CARRIED, FIT AND SAFE FOR THEIR RECEPTION, CARRIAGE AND
PRESERVATION,

1
 LAW
3. TO PROPERLY AND CAREFULLY LOAD, HANDLE, STOW, CARRY, KEEP, CARE AND DISCHARGE
THE CARGO SUBJECT TO VARIOUS IMMUNITIES PROVIDED,
4. AFTER THE GOODS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED ISSUE A BILL OF LADING(TO THE SHIPPER) SHOWING:
1. LEADING MARKS NECESSARY FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE CARGO,
2. EITHER THE NUMBER OF PACKAGES OR PIECES OR WEIGHT OR QUANTITY OR AS FURNISHED BY
THE SHIPPER,
3. THE APPARENT CONDITION OF THE CARGO. THERE IS NO OBLIGATION FOR SUCH DETAILS IF THE
CARRIER CANNOT SUSPECTS ACCURACY AND CANNOT PHYSICALLY CHECK THE CARGO.
5. THE BILL OF LADING SHALL BE A PRIME FACIE EVIDENCE OF THE RECEIPT OF THE GOODS BY
THE CARRIER AS DESCRIBED THEREIN,
6. TO ASSURE THE CARRIER OF THE ACCURACY OF THE DECLARATION OF GOODS MADE BY THE
SHIPPER, THE SHIPPER SHALL INDEMNIFY THE CARRIER OF ANY LIABILITIES ARISING DUE TO
ANY INACCURACIES OF SUCH DECLARATION,
7. TO RECEIVE A NOTICE OF DAMAGE OR LOSS AT THE PORT OF DISCHARGE AT THE TIME OF
DISCHARGING. IF THE LOSS OR DAMAGE IS NOT APPARENT AT THE TIME OF DISCHARGE, THEN
SUCH A NOTICE CAN BE GIVEN WITHIN 3 DAYS,
8. AFTER LOADING TO PROVIDE THE SHIPPER WITH A “SHIPPED B/L”, ON DEMAND.

SEAWORTHINESS UNDER ARTICLE III

1. THE SHIP SHOULD BE PROPERLY MANNED, EQUIPPED AND SUPPLIED TO MAKE IT CARGO
WORTHY,
2. THE HOLDS, REFRIGERATION AND COOL CHAMBERS, AND ALL OTHER PARTS OF THE SHIP IN
WHICH GOODS ARE CARRIED, FIT AND SAFE FOR THEIR RECEPTION, CARRIAGE AND
PRESERVATION.

EVOLUTION OF COGSA
1. IN THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURY WHEN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE WAS DEVELOPING, THE
LIABILITIES OF ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE TO CARGO WAS SOLELY ON THE SHIP-OWNER, WHO EVEN
ACTED AS CARGO INSURERS AT THAT TIME.
2. OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, THE SHIPOWNERS STARTED TO REDUCE THEIR LIABILITIES, AT FIRST
BY PERILS OF THE SEA AND THEN BY THE CAUSES OF THEIR OWN NEGLIGENCE.
3. DURING THE 19TH CENTURY, THE SHIP OWNERS WERE IN A BETTER STATE OF BARGAINING THAN
THE SHIPPERS, THE EXEMPTION AND ESCEPTION CLAUSES IN THE CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE
BECAME SUCH THAT THE CONCEPT OF B/L ALMOST BECAME WORTHLESS.
4. THERE WAS A DEMAND BY SHIPPERS, IMPORTERS, BANKERS AND INSURERS TO MAKE LAWS
AGAINST THE MONOPOLY OF THE SHIP OWNERS.
5. ANOTHER DIFFICULTY FACED BY THE MARITIME COMMUNITY WAS THAT THE RULES AND
REGULATIONS WERE NOT UNIVERSAL BUT WERE DIFFERENT FOR DIFFERENT COUNTRIES.
6. THUS IN 1924 THE HAGUE RULES WERE ACCEPTED BY MANY COUNTRIES.
7. IN THE LATE FIFTIES, THERE WAS A DEMAND TO AMMEND THESE RULES BECAUSE OF THE
POUND LOSING ITS CONVERTIBILITY TO GOLD.
8. THUS IN 1968 THE HAGUE RULES WERE AMMENDED, IN 1977 THEY WERE ADOPTED AS HAGUE
VISBY RULES AND IN 1984 THEY CAME INTO FORCE.
9. INDIA ADOPTED THE HAGUE VISBY RULES BY AMMENDING THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA
ACT.