The Nature of the Time Limit for the Exercise of Claims for Loss or Damage to Goods under the Hague-Visby Rules – Limitation or Expiry? The recent judgement no. 185/2024 of the 4th Section of the Murcia Provincial Court dated 8 February 2024, reviewing the case law referring to the nature of the one (1) year period for the exercise of claims for loss or damage during carriage by sea under a bill of lading established by the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to Bills of Lading signed on 25 August 1924, as amended by the Protocols of 23 February 1968 and 21 December 1979, the Hague-Visby Rules, has taken a position in favour of the figure of expiry of time. The aforementioned ruling therefore joins other rulings in favour of expiry of time, such as, for example, No. 269/2023 of 26 January 2023 of the 1st Section of the Provincial Court of Pontevedra, to which it refers to summarise the controversy. The latter, in turn, cites Supreme Court judgments No 328/1983 of 7 June 1983, No 43/1984 of 31 January 1984, No 339/1984 of 30 May 1984, No 56/1985 of 29 January 1985 and No 583/1985 of 11 October 1985, which declare that the time limit provided for in Article 3.6 of the Hague-Visby Rules is one of limitation. Referring to other judgments which, on the contrary, have declared that this period is a limitation period and not an expiry period, the aforementioned judgment no. 185/2024 of the Murcia Provincial Court, which is the subject of this article, also agrees with the judgment of the Pontevedra Provincial Court of 26 January 2023 in that, although article 278. 4 and Article 286 of the Maritime Navigation Act, when regulating the contractual carrier’s recourse actions against the actual carrier and the actions arising from the charterparty, use the expression “limitation” not “expiry”, this should not lead to error since the Hague-Visby Rules are of preferential application to national regulations and their interpretation must be made in accordance with them. We invite you to continue reading on www.aiyon.es AIYON Abogados #hayavisbyrules #cargodamage #timebar #expiration https://lnkd.in/dzADrqCz
AIYON Abogados LLP’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
🚢 Jurisdiction of French courts in shipping disputes: what you need to know! 🇫🇷 The French Supreme Court has recently confirmed that forum selection clauses in bills of lading, particularly those outside the EU, might not always hold up in French courts. This decision could have a major impact on shipping contracts involving French parties, especially post-Brexit. If your bill of lading refers to a non-EU court, it’s worth reviewing to avoid surprises. Read more: https://lnkd.in/eN6aZmkK 💡 Want to learn more about this ruling and its implications? Contact our Claims team at claims@nnpc.nl. #ShippingLaw #Logistics #FrenchLaw #InternationalTrade #LegalInsights
-
⚖️ FMC Allows Class Action Complaints Breaking news from the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC): The FMC has announced that class action complaints are now allowed. This means that groups of people can combine their resources to file complaints together, making it easier to address unfair practices in the maritime industry. The FMC believes this will help ensure fair treatment and compliance with regulations. At John S. James Co., we are dedicated to providing exceptional customs brokerage and freight forwarding services. Our expertise ensures that your shipments are handled efficiently and securely, even as industry regulations evolve. Stay informed and trust us to manage the complexities of the logistics landscape. Visit johnsjames.com to learn more about our services and how we can support your business. #Logistics #FreightForwarding #CustomsBrokerage #FMC #ClassAction #MaritimeLaw #JohnSJamesCo #SupplyChain #ShippingIndustry #LegalUpdates
-
📜 The Carriage of Goods by Sea Bill, 2024: Modernizing India’s Maritime Law 🚢 The Carriage of Goods by Sea Bill, 2024 was introduced in Parliament on 09/08/2024 to replace the almost century-old Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925. This new Bill is designed to align India’s maritime laws with international conventions like the Hague-Visby Rules and the Hamburg Rules. It aims to enhance transparency, efficiency, and accountability in the shipping industry by clearly defining the rights and responsibilities of carriers, shippers, and consignees. By strengthening legal protections and reducing ambiguities, the Bill promises better handling of maritime disputes and increased trust in India’s trade ecosystem. The bill is yet to be passes in the Lok and Raja Sabha Read the draft here : https://lnkd.in/gWyFEiBA #MaritimeLaw #CarriageOfGoodsBySea #ShippingIndustry #LegalReforms #TradeAndLogistics
-
This case illustrates the complex relationship that can exist between proceedings brought against two different sea carriers arising out of the same event. French Courts addressed the following question: how can judgments issued in one of the proceedings be used in the other proceedings? Read more in our latest blog from Antoine Guillemot. #Reedsmith #Shipping https://lnkd.in/eGmyTttW
-
And what do you mean by "current"? Yes, it sounds like a question only a lawyer would ask. And for good reason - as witnessed by this case. The employee signed an arbitration agreement that spelled out certain exceptions to it required by statute: "The only exceptions to binding arbitration shall be for claims arising under [various enumerated laws like the California Workers' Compensation Act][...], or other claims that are not subject to arbitration under current law." The law at the time the agreement was signed was that courts could not force someone "to arbitrate based on a predispute agreement — both the individual and non-individual components of a PAGA (Private Attorney General Act) claim." The law changed before the worker and the company had a dispute. The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, which stated that PAGA claims could be subject to arbitration. So what law applies ? The court held that the reference to "current law" referred to the law in effect when the agreement was signed - not the law in effect when the dispute arose. Drafting lesson: Do not just refer to "current law." Instead specify “under current law, as it may be interpreted in the future.”
-
Availability of Class Action Complaints at the FMC The Federal Maritime Commission issued a policy statement today making clear it is an appropriate venue where private parties may bring class actions to resolve disputes covered by the statutes the agency administers. The guidance yields important benefits to parties that might otherwise be hesitant to initiate legal actions at the FMC for fear of retaliation or because the amount of money in dispute may be less than the cost of litigation for an individual claimant. The availability of the class action mechanism will help create a more level playing field for private parties seeking protection from potentially unlawful conduct. Today’s announcement is a continuation of efforts by the Commission in recent years to reduce barriers for private party litigants seeking redress of potential Shipping Act violations. The Commission issued a policy statement in December 2021 making clear that shippers’ associations and trade associations can file complaints on behalf of others alleging violations of the law. The Commission successfully implemented a process for Charge Complaints, as set out in the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA 2022), which provide individuals with a simplified and expedited way to challenge some invoices. More than $3.5 million in fees have been voluntarily waived or refunded by common carriers through the Commission-administered Charge Complaint process since June 2022. Further, the Commission is ensuring the timely adjudication of the record number of pending proceedings that have been filed at the Commission in recent years by adding resources to the Office of the Administrative Law Judges. https://lnkd.in/e6fCd4kD
-
Director at Reed Smith Resource Law Alliance | Capital Markets, M&A, Private Equity, Venture Capital, Start-Up Advisory
UK Supreme Court Rules on the Interpretation of "Reasonable Endeavours" in Force Majeure Clauses • In a landmark decision, the UK Supreme Court overturned a previous ruling by the Court of Appeal, clarifying the interpretation of "reasonable endeavours" in force majeure clauses. The case involved a contract of affreightment between MUR Shipping BV and RTI Ltd, where RTI (because of its parent company) faced sanction restriction that prevented payment in US dollars as specified in the contract. • MUR invoked the force majeure provision and suspended performance, while RTI challenged the notice and offered to pay in euros instead. • The UK Supreme Court held that a party relying on a force majeure provision is not obligated to accept non-contractual performance as part of exercising reasonable endeavours to overcome a force majeure event. • This decision provides important guidance on the scope of force majeure clauses and reasonable endeavours and emphasises that affected parties are not required to accept alternative performance that deviates from the original contractual terms. #sanction #forcemajeure https://lnkd.in/gaGsaYdb
-
TDM Law Journal Special Issue on #Maritime #Law #Arbitration: Procedural and Substantive Issues - free excerpt https://lnkd.in/gCPkA58
-
Muthu Jagannath sheds light on the intricacies of Back2Back contracts, emphasizing the risks posed by traditional business practices that may appear convenient but lack robust legal backing. The essence of trust in business is inversely proportional to enforceability of rights. Explore more on #MaritimeLaw #CarriageLaws #Charterparties #MaritimeClaims #Admiralty #ContractLaw in this insightful piece: https://lnkd.in/dkEg4ZJm #LegalInsights #legalupdates #MaritimeLaw #CarriageLaws #lawofcontract #liability #damages #MaritimeClaim #Admiralty #commonlaw #SEAMaritimeLaw #SG #India #LitigationUpdate #DisputeAvoidance #DisputeResolution #FrieghtForwarders #NVOCCs
-
Partner, Head of Commercial Road Transport, JMW Solicitors | Director, Women in Bus & Coach | Women in Transport | Vice Chair, RHA Coaches | Transaid Ambassador | Liveryman, Worshipful Company of Carmen |
In JMW Solicitors LLP’ latest blog, Ben Johnson considers the recent UK Supreme Court decision dealing with non-contractual performance and commercial solutions. Key points for operators: - the courts are generally reluctant to ‘meddle’ in commercial contracts between businesses, so take legal advice at the outset - in the event of non-performance, even apparently sensible, commercial ‘work-around’ proposals may not overcome a party’s right to contractual certainty, so if non-performance arises seek legal advice #jmw #inyourcorner #commercialcontracts #nonperformance
In our latest blog Ben Johnson explains about the recent UK Supreme Court decision in RTI Ltd (Respondent) V MUR Shipping BV (Appellant) [2024]. Ben answers the question about whether commercial solutions and other non-contractual arrangements are required to save a contract.
