Canada: Canadian Court Asserts Jurisdiction In Case Involving Shipment From Taiwan to the U.S.

Last Updated: December 16 2010

Edited by Graham Walker

Mr. Justice Sean J. Harrington of the Federal Court rendered a decision on jurisdiction in a marine cargo claim and exercising his discretion on a motion under subsect. 50(1) of the Federal Courts Act in a case to which subsect. 46(1) of the Marine Liability Act applied.

Rich Palm, a Taiwanese company, sold roller chains and parts to Hitachi Maxco (a U.S. company) and shipped the cargo from Kaoshiung, Taiwan, to Portland, Oregon, aboard the YM PROSPERITY. Kuehne & Nagel Ltd. (KN Ltd.) of Taiwan, as agents of Transpac Container System Ltd. doing business as Blue Anchor Line (BAL - a Taiwanese company) issued a nonnegotiable bill of lading for the shipment. BAL acted as a NVOCC. BAL's bill of lading specified Hong Kong law and jurisdiction except as regards performance of the carriage, which, in the case of a shipment to the U.S. would be subject to U.S. COGSA. The bill of lading showed Rich Palm as shipper, Hitachi Maxco as consignee, and the carrier as BAL, the port of shipment as Kaoshiung, the port of discharge as Tacoma, Washington, and the place of delivery as Portland, Oregon. KN Ltd. entrusted the cargo to Dolphin Logistics (DL) as carrier which issued its own bill of lading. The DL bill of lading showed Kuehne & Nagel Ltd. as shipper, Kuehne & Nagel Inc. ("KN Inc." - the U.S. branch of the same company) as consignee, with delivery to be applied for to Shipco Transport of Tukwila, Washington. DL's bill of lading described KN Ltd. and KN Inc. as agents for BAL. KN Ltd. later issued a freight invoice to Hitachi Maxco for the freight owing on the shipment, purporting to act as agent for Hitachi Maxco in performing duties related to customs entry and release of the goods. The terms of that contract were to be construed according to the laws of the State of New York, with irrevocable jurisdiction given to the U.S. District Court and the State Courts of New York. Hanjin Shipping (whose involvement in the case was unclear) wrote to Shipco Transport saying it was informed by Yang Ming Marine Transport, as owners/operators of the carrying vessel, that the ship had encountered heavy weather on the voyage to the U.S., resulting in the loss overboard of, or heavy damage to, the container holding the cargo in question. Rich Palm and Hitachi Maxco took suit in the Federal Court of Canada against DL, BAL, KN Ltd. and KN Inc. for losses suffered by the cargo interests. The defendants moved for a stay of proceedings under subsect. 50(1) of the Federal Courts Act.

Harrington J. noted that the Federal Court's jurisdiction depended on the action pertaining to a federal legislative class of subjects, with federal law on point and the administration of that law conferred upon the Court. A claim for cargo loss or damage met those criteria, with both subject matter and juridical jurisdiction having been bestowed on the Federal Court in accordance with the definition of Canadian Maritime Law and subsect. 22(2) of the Federal Courts Act. There was also federal law to administer. The subject matter jurisdiction ("rationae material") was subject to no geographical limitations as to the place of shipment or intended shipment or the place of receipt or intended receipt of the cargo. The statements of claim in this case were purportedly personally served within Canada and the service, not having been contested, was apparently valid. The Federal Court always had discretion to hear a case on the merits notwithstanding a foreign forum selection clause, although jurisprudence had developed requiring the grant of a stay of proceedings in the light of such a clause in most cases. A forum non conveniens stay could be granted only if there was a more appropriate forum displacing the forum selected by the plaintiff. Subsect. 46(1) of the Marine Liability Act (MLA) applied in this case, as the defendants had an agency in Canada. But that provision, where applicable, had been interpreted so as to remove the Federal Court's discretion under subsect. 50(1) of the Federal Courts Act to stay proceedings only where a foreign jurisdiction or foreign arbitration clause was the sole factor justifying a stay. Subsect. 46(1) did not remove the Court's discretion to stay in other circumstances, where factors apart from the foreign forum selection clause militated in favour of sending of the case to the clearly more appropriate jurisdiction.

In determining whether or not to grant a stay in this case, Harrington J. placed little value on the New York jurisdiction clause of the freight invoice. It was issued after the bill of lading and covered KN Inc.'s activities as an agent for the cargo interests. That company was being sued, rightly or wrongly, as a carrier. Nor would that clause benefit the other moving parties. The defendants, alleged to be carriers, had the burden of proving absence of liability, given that the cargo had not been delivered in sound order and condition. They had not identified the evidence they wished to bring forward in defence or the witnesses they needed on many points. In The Cougar Ace, the Federal Court of Appeal considered that the motion judge had undervalued certain factors in dismissing the motion to stay, notably the residence of the parties, the witnesses and the experts, the existence of proceedings in another jurisdiction and the applicable law. BAL had not shown any advantage to proceeding in Hong Kong other than that it was that company's home jurisdiction. A suit there would probably be time-barred by the one-year limitation period of the Hague Rules. No suggestion had been made that U.S. law differed from Canadian law except for the customary freight unit limitation of liability. Both laws derived from the Brussels Convention of 1924. The basic rule was that the choice of forum rests with the plaintiff. There was no allegation of proceedings in any other Court in Hong Kong, New York or elsewhere. Accordingly, no other jurisdiction appeared clearly more appropriate than Canada and Harrington J. dismissed the motion for a stay.

Whilst the decision for the most part is probably a reasonable exercise of the Federal Court's discretion in respect of granting a stay of proceedings, it does raise an issue as to its jurisdiction over DL. Judgement was entered by default against DL on the basis that it failed to file a Statement of Defence after having been served at one Shipco Transport Inc. (Shipco) with an office located just outside of Montréal. Shipco's apparent principal place of business is in Tukwila, Washington. The Order specifies that the motion was dismissed and that all parties (but DL) were granted a delay of 30 days within which to file their Statement of Defence.

There was no mention as to whether service upon DL was valid. Arguably Shipco Montréal was not an agent or branch office and did not constitute a place of business of DL as contemplated by Section 46 of the MLA, but rather was simply a local agent of its principal in Washington. In those circumstances, it is submitted that the Federal Court would have been without jurisdiction (rationae personae) to hear the Plaintiffs' claim against DL. As there is no suggestion that DL had a branch or place of business in Canada or that it regularly makes use of an agent in Canada, the shipment was not to or from a port in Canada, the Plaintiffs were not Canadian based, the cargo was not destined to Canada, there was no provision in any of the contractual documents for the application of Canadian law, the carrying vessel apparently was not Canadian registered, the crew seemingly was not Canadian and DL was a foreign corporation, it seems likely that the Federal Court had no basis for maintaining jurisdiction against DL as a named defendant.

This highlights the need to analyze the facts and merits of each case before simply attorning to the jurisdiction of the Courts in this country as there may well be a basis to assert that the Courts are without jurisdiction. This is particularly true as there is a trend developing in the Courts to assume jurisdiction. To assert claims before the Federal Court can be attractive, especially for cargo shipped from or destined to the United States which, generally speaking, still applies a package limitation of $500. whereas the Courts in Canada would likely apply the Hague-Visby limitation.

About BLG

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions