- within Law Department Performance topic(s)
- with readers working within the Healthcare industries
OVERVIEW
In this case, the Court of Appeal determined two issues of principle arising under the Hague/Hague-Visby Rules (“the Rules”) which had not previously been the subject of authoritative determination by the English Courts, namely:
- Whether proceedings brought solely to obtain security amount to a “suit” for the purposes of the one-year time bar in Article III,6; and
- What must be “stated” on the bill of lading for cargo to be “deck cargo” within Article I(c) (such that the Rules do not apply to it)?
The context for these issues was a dispute over whether the owners of TAIKOO BRILLIANCE were liable under four bills of lading for the misdelivery of a cargo of timber. The owners contended that the claim was time-barred under Article III,6 of the Rules. The cargo interests refuted this on the basis that: (a) proceedings to obtain security had been commenced in time; (b) some of the cargo was carried on deck such that the Rules did not apply at all to that cargo.
The Court of Appeal determined both questions in favour of the owners, who were represented by Chris Smith KC and Maya Chilaeva, instructed by HFW (Chris Metcalf, Remi Cruttenden).
To view the full article please click here.
Download judgement here.
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.
[View Source]
