Aspects of the Hague Rules : A Comparative Study in English and French Law

It has been estimated that four-fifths of an carriage of goods by sea are governed by the Hague Rules, properly known as the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to Bills of Lading, signed at Brussels in 1924. The success of the Convention is wen recognised. Its importance is self-evident and such that, notwithstanding its success, it has been the subject of regular scrutiny with a view to improvement and reform. Attention has focussed on various matters, among them two central provisions which are the subject of this book. First to be considered is article X concerning the legal scope of the Convention: to which contracts for carriage under bills of lading does the Convention apply? This question has caused much trouble, was debated by the C. M. 1. for twenty years and was apparently settled by a new Conven­ tion signed at Brussels in 1968; but the solution may never come into force as the entire Convention is currently being considered by the United Nations with a view to reform of a different kind. The second part of the book examines one of the fundamental duties in the Convention. The ultimate duties of the carrier are duties of due diligence, diligence in caring for cargo and diligence in preparing his ship for sea. It is the latter duty that has been selected for detailed study.

One: The Scope of the Brussels Convention 1924.- 1. History of the Brussels Convention.- 1. The Origins of the Convention.- 2. The Lessons of History.- 2. Introduction to the Scope of the Brussels Convention.- 1. Juridical Nature of the Convention.- 2. Apparent Scope of the Convention: Article X.- 3. History of Article X.- 4. Meaning of Article X.- (i) Article X is not concerned with the scope of the Convention.- (ii) Article X imposes an insterstate obligation to give effect to the Convention.- (iii) Article X as a ‘Vorbehaltsklausel’.- (iv) Article X as a model for a uniform conflicts rule.- 5. The Convention applies to both International and Domestic Contracts.- 6. Conclusion.- 3. The Scope of the Convention in the Law of England.- 1. Introduction.- 2. History of Section 1, Cogsa 1924.- 3. The Failure of the English Formula for Uniformity.- 4. The Torni.- 5. The Vita Food Case.- 6. The St. Joseph.- 7. Can the English Formula be Remedied?.- (i) The doctrine of renvoi.- (ii) Application of the lex loci contractus.- (iii) Public policy.- 8. The Reform of Article X.- 4. The Scope of the Convention in the Law of France: Introduction.- 1. National and International Contracts.- 2. The Conflict of Texts at Domestic Level.- 3. The ‘Brasiluso’ Solution.- 4. Plan.- 5. The Liberal Approach.- 1. Early Attitudes of the Courts.- 2. The Cases taking a Liberal Approach before the Tribunaux de Commerce.- 3. The Cases taking a Liberal Approach in the Cours d’Appel.- 4. The Academic Writers.- (i) Niboyet and Sauvage.- (ii) Jambu-Merlin.- (iii) Rodière.- 5. The Significance of the Liberal Solution.- (i) The object of the Convention.- (ii) International contracts in the conflict of laws.- (iii) Should uniform law be confined to international contracts ?.- 6. Conclusion.- 6. The Voyage Test.- 1. Introduction.- 2. Introduction to the Cases Applying the Voyage Test.- 3. The Cases in the Lower Courts.- 4. The Cases in the Higher Courts.- 5. Cases in which the Voyage Test was not Applied.- 6. The Cases in which the Voyage Test was Rejected.- 7. The Academic Writers.- (i) Mezger and De Juglart.- (ii) Prodromides, Jambu-Merlin and the implications of Article X.- (iii) Guyon and the merits of the voyage test.- (iv) Dubosc.- 8. Successive Transports.- 9. The Solution for Other Modes of Transport.- 7. The Nationality Test: The Preliminary Problem.- 1. Introduction.- 2. The Attitude of the Courts.- (i) Reference to the parties to the contract.- (ii) Reference to the parties in the bill of lading.- (iii) Reference to the carrier and the shipper.- (iv) Reference to the consignee.- (v) Cases rejecting reference to the consignee.- 3. The Consignee must be known ab initio.- 4. Attitude of the Courts: Summary.- 5. The Academic Writers.- 8. The Nationality Test.- 1. Introduction.- 2. The Cases in the Tribunaux de Commerce.- 3. The Cases in the Cours d’Appel.- 4. The Cases in the Cour de Cassation.- 5. The Cases in which the Nationality Test was Rejected.- 6. The Academic Writers.- 7. Practical Considerations.- 8. The Ripert Solution.- 9. The Double Rule.- 1. Introduction.- 2. Authority that the Parties must be from HCPs.- 3. Cases Requiring that both Ports be in HCPs.- 4. Other Authority.- (i) Other countries.- (ii) Certainty.- (iii) The academic writers.- (iv) The Warsaw Convention.- 5. Conclusion.- 10. Reform of Article X.- 1. The Conferences of the C.M.I. at Rijeka and Stockholm.- 2. The Brussels Conference.- 3. Comment.- 4. The Future.- Two: Due Diligence to Make the Ship Seaworthy.- 11. The History of the Carriers Liability.- 1. Basic Liability of the Carrier — Phase I.- 2. Basic Liability of the Carrier — Phase II.- 3. The Justification of Strict Liability.- 4. Exceptions to Liability.- (i) Ex lege.- 5. Exceptions to Liability.- (ii) Ex contractu.- 6. The Warranty of Seaworthiness.- (i) Its existence.- (ii) The concept.- (iii) Duration.- (iv) Proof.- 12. The Scheme of Proof Under the Convention.- 1. Seaworthiness in the Texts.- 2. The Answer in Outline.- (i) The short route.- (ii) The popularity of article IV rule 2(p) in France.- (iii) The long route.- 3. Performance of Article III Rule I as a Condition Precedent to Exoneration.- (i) The proposition in common law countries.- (ii) The analogy with article III rule 2.- (iii) France: Présomption de responsabilité.- (iv) Conclusion and comparison.- 4. Article IV Rule i as an Excepted Peril.- (i) The proposition.- (ii) England.- (iii) France.- (iv) Criticism and comparison.- 5. Article IV Rule I as a Complement to Article III Rule I.- (i) The need for precaution.- (ii) The overriding effect of article III rule 1.- (iii) The overriding effect of faute in France.- (iv) The systems contrasted.- 6. Summary.- 13. Proof That the Vessel Was Defective.- 1. The Defect.- 2. When Must the Defect Exist?.- (i) On the short route to article IV rule 2(p).- (ii) On the long route.- 3. Proof of the Defect.- (i) Onus.- (ii) Method of proof.- 4. Causation.- (i) The requirement.- (ii) Breach of contract and exemption.- (iii) The merits of the proposition.- (iv) Loss partly caused by unseaworthiness.- (v) The causal connection.- 5. Conclusion.- 14. Due Diligence in General.- 1. Due Diligence and the General Law.- 2. Due Diligence Defined.- 3. Due Diligence and Latent Defects.- 4. Latent Defects and Force Majeure.- 5. The Short Route and the Long Route Compared.- 15. Due Diligence in Practice.- 1. Men and Materials.- 2. Certificates of Seaworthiness.- (i) The attitude of the courts to certificates.- (ii) When will a certificate be conclusive?.- (iii) Rebuttal of certificates.- 3. The Influence of Questions of Fact.- (i) Factors diminishing the carrier’s duty.- (ii) Factors increasing the activity required of the carrier.- 16. When Must Due Diligence Have Been Exercised?.- 1. England.- (i) The effect of article III rule i on the doctrine of stages.- (ii) When must the carrier begin to exercise due diligence?.- (iii) When does the carrier’s duty to exercise due diligence end?.- (iv) Intermediate ports.- 2. England and France.- 3. France: Continuing Diligence.- 17. Liability for Independent Contractors.- 1. The Muncaster Castle.- 2. General Arguments.- 3. Common Law Precedent.- (i) Analogies.- (ii) The Angliss case.- (iii) Decisions under the Harter Act.- (iv) Other cases.- 4. The Law of France and Other Countries.- 5. Conclusion.- 6. Reform.