The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 received Royal Assent on 7 April 2005. The Act amends the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and is of relevance to providers of public transport, particularly the rail sector.
To view the article in full please see below:
Full Article
The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 received Royal Assent on 7 April 2005. The Act amends the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, introducing provisions that will impact on all providers of public transport, particularly the rail sector.
Right of access to services (Part III of the 1995 Act)
Section 19 of the 1995 Act prohibits providers of services from discriminating against disabled people in the provision of services - by, for example, failing to make reasonable adjustments....
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
In this case, the Commercial Court considered whether or not a cargo carried on a ship’s deck should be considered a "deck cargo" for the purposes of the Hague-Visby Rules ("the Rules"), such that the carriage of this cargo fell outside the ambit of the Rules.
This case concerned a demand against Kookmin Bank under a number of advance payment bonds issued in connection with a series of ship building contracts.
In this case, the High Court of Hong Kong was asked to determine whether the ship-owners were under any duty in bailment to complete the original voyage and deliver cargo following withdrawal of the vessel by the ship-owners part way through a voyage for non-payment of hire.
The charterers time chartered the LPG tanker 'Gaz Energy' from her disponent owners on the Shelltime 3 form - which attached rider clauses and a Gas Form C.
The new Inter-Club Agreement 2011 came into effect on 1 September 2011. The dispute in this case required the court to consider the interplay between the previous version, ICA 1996, and an amended Centrocon arbitration clause, where both were incorporated into the time charterparty and where they
potentially conflicted.
A recent decision of the Commercial Court in London (handed down on 8 November 2011) has clarified the limits of a shipowner's obligation under the Conwartime 1993 clauses to obey his charterer's orders to navigate waters rendered parlous because of the threat of piracy.
In our January 2011 Shipping E-brief, we reviewed the first instance decision in this matter, where the Commercial Court held that the Advance Payment Guarantees issued by an insurance company were "on-demand" performance bonds rather than "see to it"
guarantees.
Twitter
Facebook
Digg 
