UK: "Rafaela S" – House Of Lords Gives It To Us "Straight"

Last Updated: 16 May 2005
Article by Carlo Sammarco

A unanimous House of Lords provides definitive guidance on the status of "Straight" bills of lading under s 1(4) of Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971 and Art 1(B) of the Hague-Visby rules. Continuing a much needed focus on market trade and practice when interpreting bills of lading, the House stated that international maritime conventions should not be restricted to interpretation under notions of domestic law but rather construed by reference to broad principles of international mercantile usage and acceptance.

At last the House of Lords in JI MacWilliam Co Inc -v- Mediterranean Shipping Company SA [2005] UK HL 11 (The "Rafaela S") has provided some definitive guidance on the recent debate as to whether a bill of lading consigned to a named consignee, a so-called "straight" bill of lading, is a conforming document under Article I (b) of the Hague/ Hague-Visby Rules (the "Rules"). Indeed, on 16 February 2005 the House of Lords unanimously confirmed the Court of Appeal’s 2003 decision that a "straight" bill of lading was indeed a "bill of lading or any similar document of title" within the meaning of Section 1 (4) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971 and Article I (b) of the Rules.

In 1989 the Appellants, Mediterranean Shipping Company ("Carriers"), contracted with an American company to carry four containers of printing equipment from Durban to Felixstowe and onward to Boston. The respondent, JI MacWilliam Company Inc (the "Consignees"), were to be the consignees. On 18 December 1989 the Carriers issued a set of three documents, described on their face as bills of lading. The consignee box on the document contained the words "consignee: B/L not negotiable unless "Order Of "". The box was completed with the name and address of the Consignees and with nothing more. Except for the fact that the bill of lading was transferable to the named consignee, it contained the usual terms regarding the matters relevant to the allocation of risks between the parties which are to be found in a traditional bill of lading.

On the voyage the goods were damaged and the Consignees consequently brought a claim against the Carriers. The Consignees contended that the Rules applied to the carriage of the goods and consequently their claim would be subject to the package limitation regime established thereunder (a total of US$150,000). The Carriers however, contended that US COGSA was applicable and therefore the claims were subject to its lower limitation provisions (reducing the Consignees’ claim to no more than US$2,000). The principal question upon which the arbitrators, at first instance, had to focus was which regime should apply to the carriage of the goods, the Rules or US COGSA.

The Arbitrators held, a decision upheld by Langley J on appeal to the Commercial Court, that a "straight" bill of lading fell outside the scope of Article I (b) of the Rules and that the applicable package limitation regime was therefore that under US COGSA. This, however, was reversed by the Court of Appeal (Peter Gibson & Rix LJJ and Jacob J). The House of Lords was quick to adopt the finding of the Court of Appeal and particularly the comprehensive judgment of Rix LJ, upon which the reasoning of the Lords placed the most reliance.

The judgment was delivered by Lords Brown, Steyn and Bingham. Although each gave a separate judgment, they all had a common approach to the issue in question. Whilst this did involve an historical analysis as to the development of the concept of a "bill of lading", their approach nevertheless focussed on matters of market trade and practice. In this respect the Lords preferred to shy away from fine and technical distinctions and arguments on interpretation put forward by the Carriers. Instead the Lords preferred to look at the question of interpretation through the eyes of traders, bankers and insurers who the Lords said would be inclined to take a more commercial view. This is not an unfamiliar approach for the House of Lords when looking at the interpretation of bills of lading (see their judgment (which notably also included Lords Bingham & Steyn) in the "Starsin" [2003] UKHL 12).

By reference to the historical development of the bill of lading both in the UK and abroad and indeed the background to the formulation of, in particular, the Hague Rules and relevant international legislation since, the view expressed by the Lords was that "bill of lading or any similar document of title" were in fact words of expansion as opposed to restriction. Lord Steyn went on to add that the restrictive approach revealed a "preoccupation with notions of domestic law regarding documents of title" which he felt should not "govern the interpretation of international maritime conventions". Indeed, he felt that the Rules should be construed by reference to the "broad principles of general acceptation appropriate to the international mercantile subject matter". He added that "straight" bills were in use before the Hague Rules were adopted and the framers of the Hague Rules would certainly have been aware of the widespread mercantile use of the "straight" bill at the time. Consequently, if it had been intended to exclude "straight" bills of lading from the Rules then no doubt special provision to that effect would have been made.

As far as UK legislation was concerned, the Lords looked at how the "bill of lading" was defined under the Bills of Lading Act 1855. Section 1 provides that "every consignee named in a bill of lading" is empowered to sue upon it. Before the Act property in the goods passed to a named consignee but he had no right to sue in contract for cargo damage during the voyage unless the shipper had effected the original contract as agent for the consignee. If Section 1 is interpreted restrictively then the named consignee in a "straight" bill of lading could, on that basis, neither sue nor be sued on a contract of carriage evidenced by the bill of lading. Lord Steyn was quick in recognising that such an interpretation was implausible and therefore must be rejected.

The Carriers placed much emphasis on the traditional definition of a bill of lading and in particular to its endorseability. They argued that as a "straight" bill was a non-negotiable document, it was this that set it apart from a "traditional" bill and made it more akin to a seawaybill (not recognised as a conforming document under the Rules). The Lords rejected this argument saying that the "straight" bill’s non-negotiability was the only thing that it had in common with a seawaybill. The main difference between the two being that presentation of the seawaybill by the consignee (on production of satisfactory ID) was not required to take delivery of the goods, whereas for a "straight" bill it was, presentation of the original document in order to obtain delivery being the principal characteristic of a document of title. In the hands of the named consignee a "straight" bill is the consignee’s document of title. A seawaybill, however, is never a document of title. The fact that a "straight" bill is issued in a set of three original bills was important, as it was this feature which implied that delivery could only be made against presentation of the bill itself. Lord Bingham confirmed Rix LJ’s comments in this respect which in turn affirmed the Singapore Court of Appeal’s decision in Voss v Apl [2002] 2 LLR 707 and stated that, if necessary, he would hold that production of a "straight" bill is a necessary pre-condition of requiring delivery even where there is no express provision to that effect.

In their adoption of a commercial approach the predominant feature of the Lords’ judgments was that they were prepared not to look too far beyond the face of the document itself. The "straight" bill had all the characteristics and wordings of a traditional bill of lading. Consequently, although the Lords recognised it was for the Court to determine the nature and effect of a legal document and that it was not bound by the label which the parties had chosen to apply to it, in circumstances where such was a bona fide mercantile document issued in the ordinary course of business, the Court would be slow to reject the description which the document bore especially where the document is issued by the party seeking to reject the description (in this case the Carriers). Ultimately the aim was to maintain the function of the bill of lading as intended by the parties, namely that the document should work as merchants would expect it to work.

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 Mondaq.com.

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

Authors
 
In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
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
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.