1

CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA- ROTTERDAM RULES

Gizem KAYAR

”RatificationoftheRotterdamRulesbysufficientsovereignstatesforthemtocome

intoforceisoverdueandthedelaypuzzling;theyprovideaschemeofliabilityforthe

carriageofgoodsthatisbothuniformandanimprovementuponthepresent

situation.TheyshouldreceiveuniversalapprovalandtheConventionshouldbe

ratifiedbyallsovereignstatesattheearliestopportunity.”

2

ContentsPage

1.Introduction 3

2.HistoricalBackgroundoftheRotterdamRules 3

3.AimoftheRotterdamRules 7

4.ContentandScopeoftheApplicationoftheRotterdamRules 8

5.TheviewsinfavourofRotterdamRules 13

6.TheviewsagainsttheRotterdamRules 14

7.Conclusion 17

References 18

3

1. Introduction

“UnitedNationsConventiononContractsfortheInternationalCarriageofGoods

WhollyorPartlybySea”(hereinafterasRotterdamRules)acceptedon11December

2008 and opening ceremony held on 23 September 2009 in Rotterdam. Although

RotterdamRulesreceivedhighnumberofsignaturesattheopeningceremony,they

havebeenacceptedonlybythreestatesasof20December2015.Consideringthat

RotterdamRules needs to be ratified by 20 states, there is delay for the Rules to

becomeeffective.Once the RotterdamRuleswill be effective, theywill substitute

the Hague, Hague-Visby and Hamburg Rules, which contains main principles

regardingthe internationalmaritimecarriages,aswellasthenationalandregional

regimes.ThisessaywillprovideshorthistoricalbackgroundoftheRotterdamRules.

In addition, content and scopeof theapplicationof theRuleswill beexamined in

comparison with Hague, Hague-Visby and Hamburg rules. It will be also assessed

thatwhetherRotterdamRuleswillbeabletouniformtheinternationallegislationon

maritimetransportationandimprovethecurrentsituation.

2. HistoricalBackground

Taking intoaccount thatnational legislation for regulatingcarriageofgoodsby

seawas inadequatesincemostmaritimeshipping involves internationalelements1,

theneedtoharmonisenumerousduties,obligations,liabilitiesandrightsofcarriers

and shippers in international maritime shipping was emerged among the

international community.2As a consequence, therehavebeen several attempts to

unify rules on sea transport and adopt international conventions since the 19th

century. Inthisregard,quitea few internationalconventionsonmaritimeshipping

havebeenadoptedsincethen.

1TheodoraNikaki,BarişSoyer,‘ANewInternationalRegimeforCarriageofGoodsbySea:Contemporary,Certain,InclusiveANDEfficient,orJustAnotherOnefortheShelves?’,(2012),30BerkeleyJ.Int'lLaw.303<http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/bjil/vol30/iss2/2>accessedon13December20152JoséA.E.Faria,‘UniformLawforInternationalTransportatUNCITRAL:NewTimes,NewPlayers,andNewRules’,(2009),TexasInternationalLawJournal,vol.44,279

4

TheHague conference,whichwasheld in1921, anticipated tounify legislationon

international marine shipping since some problems had been experienced in this

areaoflaw.Inthisrespect,theinternationalcommunityaccepted“theInternational

ConventionfortheUnificationofCertainRulesofLawrelatingtoBillsofLading”(the

Hague Rules) at Hague Conference in 1924.3It became effective in 1931. The

conventionprovidedchoiceforthestatepartiestointegratetherulesintodomestic

lawastheyareorchangethemwhileintegrating.4

TheHagueRuleswerepreparedaccordingtotheneedsandconditionsofthe

early20thcentury.Theswiftdevelopment in technologyandchanges in the trade

required revision in the international maritime shipping legislation.5“The Comité

Maritime International (CMI)” initiated the effort on revision of Hague Rules.

“ProtocoltoAmendtheInternationalConventionfortheUnificationofCertainRules

ofLawRelatingtoBillsofLading”(theVisbyprotocol)adoptedin1968inBrussels,

amendedtheHagueRules6.StartingadoptiontheProtocol,itwascalledasHague-

VisbyRules.TheProtocolbecameeffectivein1977.

In 1976, the United Nations Commission on the International Trade Law

(UNCITRAL) drafted “The United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by

Sea” (theHamburgRules). They are adoptedwithin the context of theDiplomatic

Conference byUnitedNational General Assembly in Hamburg in 1978.7It became

effectivein1992,almost14yearsafteritsadoption.Ontheotherhand,itiscritical

3AdmiraltyandMaritimeLawGuide,‘InternationalConventionfortheUnificationofCertainRulesofLawrelatingtoBillsofLading("HagueRules"),andProtocolofSignature’(admiraltylawguide.com)<http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/haguerules1924.html>accessedon12December20154CMI,‘Status’(comitemaritime.org)<http://www.comitemaritime.org/Uploads/pdf/CMI-SRMC.pdf>accessedon12December201555ZulkifliHasan,NazliIsmail,‘TheWeaknessoftheHagueRulesandtheextendofReformsmadebytheHagueVisbyRules’,http://www.fd.unl.pt/docentes_docs/ma/wks_MA_20177.pdf>accessedon12December20156AdmiraltyandMaritimeLawGuide,‘InternationalConventionfortheUnificationofCertainRulesofLawrelatingtoBillsofLading("HagueRules"),andProtocolofSignature’(admiraltylawguide.com)<http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/haguerules1924.html>accessedon12December20157UnitedNations,‘ResolutionadoptedbytheGeneralAssemblyonthereportoftheSixthCommittee(A/48/613)]!(Uncitral.org,1978)<https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/transport/hamburg/hamburg_rules_e.pdf>accessedon12December2015

5

to express that only 34 states have accepted theHamburg Rules8. It is commonly

agreed that Hamburg Rules are not consideredmodernisation of the Hague-Visby

Rules,buttheyshowcrucialbreakwiththepast.9TheHamburgRulesestablishedas

areplacementtothesystemcreatedbyHague-VisbyRulesandintendedtoensure

proportion between the benefit of the shippers and carriers. The Hamburg Rules

initiatedby the countries that thought tobedisadvantagedbyHague-VisbyRules.

The Hague-Visby Rules ensured more protection to the ship-owner, as a result

shippers were neglected in favour of ship-owners.10Besides deficiencies of the

Hague-Visby Rules, the necessities of the newly independent countries led to the

adoption of the Hamburg Rules.11To that end, it can be concluded that Hamburg

Ruleshavefailedtogainsupportofmainshippingstatesasthese34countriesare

only an insignificant part of global trade and none of them a big economy or key

maritimecountry.12

International conventions were unsuccessful to bring unified provisions on

maritimeshippingandtobewidelyaccepted,therehavebeenfurtherattemptsto

setupanalternativesystem.Moreover,theHague-VisbyRulesare23yearsoldand

significant changes have been observed in this area of law. The reforms on these

regimes were inevitable for this reason as well. In this regard, in 1996, “United

NationsCommissiononInternationalTradeLaw(UNCITRAL)”startedtoassesslaws

andpracticesintheareaofinternationalshipmentduringthe29thsession.13Atthe

29th Session, a secretariat established so as to collect information from different

actors including governments of both developing and developed countries, civil

8UNCITRAL,‘Status,UnitedNationsConventionontheCarriageofGoodsbySea(Hamburg,1978)<http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/transport_goods/Hamburg_status.html>,accessedon12December20159PaulMyburgh,'UniformityorUniletarismintheLawofCarriageofGoodsbySea'(2000)31(1)VUWLR,35510H.M.JokoSmart,UnitedNationsConventionontheCarriageofGoodsbySea:1978(HamburgRules):ExplanatoryDocumentation(CommonwealthSecretariat,1989)11DavidC.Fredrick,‘Politicalparticipationandlegalreformintheinternationalmaritimerulemakingprocess:fromtheHaguerulestotheHamburgrules’,(1991),JournalofMaritimeLawandCommerce,vol.22,no.1,8112Nikaki&Soyer,30313UNCITRAL,ReportoftheUnitedNationsCommissiononInternationalTradeLawontheworkofitstwenty-ninthsession28May-14June1996GeneralAssemblyOfficialRecords·Fifty-firstSessionSupplementNo.17(A/51/17)<http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/206/41/PDF/N9620641.pdf?OpenElement>accessedon13December2015

6

societyorganisationsandintergovernmentalorganisations.Inthiscontext,itcanbe

noted that broad consultation was carried out.14The working group held final

sessioninJanuary2008inViennawherethedraftConventionwasdeliveredtothe

UNCITRAL.15Subsequently, the UNCITRAL secretariat disseminated the final draft

convention to the member states of the UN for evaluation so as to finalise the

convention.

“United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of

Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea” ("Rotterdam Rules") accepted by the General

Assembly on the 67th session of 11 December 2008 in New York following seven

yearsofconcentratedinternationalnegotiations.16U.N.GeneralAssemblyinvitedall

governmentstoadopttheConvention.TheConventionopenedforsignaturein2009

and itwassignedby16statesduring theopeningceremony.RotterdamRulesare

consideredtosubstitutetheHague,Hague-VisbyandHamburgregimesthatareat

presentappliedtomarineshipping.Inaddition,theRotterdamRulesareregardedto

covertheareasthatareadministeredbynationalandregionalrulesasnotallstates

approvedoneoftheseinternationalregimes.

Despite the fact that there were high numbers of signatory states at the

beginning, Rotterdam Rules are not effective yet. They will be effective one year

after“theratification,acceptance,approvaloraccession”of20countries.17Thelast

country to sign the treatywasGuinea-Bissau, becomeparty to theConvention24

September 2013. As of December 2015, although there are 25 signatories to the

Convention,onlySpain,CongoandTogohaveacceptedtheConvention.Considering

14FrancescoBerlingieri,‘TheHistoryoftheRotterdamRules’ed.MeltemDenizGüner-Özbek,TheUnitedNationsConventiononContractsfortheInternationalCarriageofGoodsWhollyorPartlybySea:AnAppraisalofthe"RotterdamRules",(SpringerScience&BusinessMedia,2011)615UNCITRAL,UnitedNationsCommissiononInternationalTradeLawForty-firstsessionNewYork,16June-11July2008ReportofWorkingGroupIII(TransportLaw)ontheworkofitstwenty-firstsession(Vienna,14-25January2008)<http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/V08/507/44/PDF/V0850744.pdf?OpenElement>accessedon13December201516UnitedNations,'ResolutionadoptedbytheGeneralAssembly[onthereportoftheSixthCommittee(A/63/438)]'(Uncitral.org,2008)<http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/workinggroups/wg_3/res122e.pdf>accessed12December201517Article94oftheRotterdamRules

7

thatratificationprocessisveryslowaslastratificationwasmadein2011bySpain,it

isahighpossibilitythatRotterdamRuleswouldnotbeeffectiveverysoon.

TheUnitedKingdomhasintegratedHagueRulesbyadoptingthe“Carriageof

GoodsbySeaAct1924”andincorporatedHague-VisbyRulesbyadopting“Carriage

ofGoodsbySeaAct1971”andhasnotsignedRotterdamRulesyet.

3. AimoftheRotterdamRules

The existing regulations on the international marine shipping are lack of

uniformity, and fail to sufficiently regulate up-to-date transport applications and

requirements,“includingcontainerization,door-to-doortransportcontractsandthe

use of electronic transport documents.” In this regard, the intention of the

Convention is to alter The Hague rules, The Hague-Visby rules and the Hamburg

rules.18Rotterdam Rules seeks to unify the provisions regarding interests, liability

and benefits of the shippers, carriers and consignees under contract for marine

shipping and suggests provisions for the new technological developments and the

changesinthecommercial life.ThereisneedtomarkthatRotterdamRuleswillbe

binding and Rules will provide fair general regulation for marine shipping. The

acceptanceoftheRotterdamRuleswouldincreasebelowpointsasindicatedinthe

Preamble:

- Assurelegalcertainty

- Increaseeffectiveness

- Improvecommercialpredictability

- Ensureharmonizationandmodernizationoftherules

Thegoalof theuniformity isalsohighlighted inArticle2,which states that

courts and arbitration panels should take into consideration that RotterdamRules

have international personality and it is essential to support uniformity in its

application. Theuniformity is an importantelementas theUnitedStates Supreme

18RotterdamRules,‘Introduction’,<http://www.rotterdamrules.com/content/introduction>accessedon13December2015

8

CourtnotedthatdifferentviewsintheunderstandingofHagueRulesdoesnotonly

damage the visual balance in the international legalmandate but bring additional

burdentothecommercialsystemtheRulescurrentlygovern.19

4. ContentandScopeoftheApplicationoftheRotterdamRules

TheRotterdamRuleshas96provisionsandregardedtoberemarkablyinclusive

system that targets to manage the entire aspects of contracts on international

shipment. It is well noted that Rotterdam Rules contains provisions more

advantageous to carriers thananyof the current international conventionson the

areaofmarineshipping.20

Article1of theRulesprovides the listofdefinitions. It shouldbe stressed that

comparingtothepreviousinternationalconventionsontransportbysea,Article1of

theRotterdamRulesondefinitionsisextremelydetailedanditoffersthedefinition

of30concepts.Taking intoaccount thatnewconceptshavebeen introducedvery

recently in the commercial life,RotterdamRulesprovides thedescriptionof these

newconcepts.

Oneoftheground-breakingchangesbroughtbyRotterdamRulesisprotectionof

the interestsof the thirdparties.21Moreover, anyagreementestablishedbetween

carrier and shipper eliminating or increasing the limits of the liability, will not be

bindingonthirdpartiesrights.

ThescopeoftheRotterdamRulesissetoutintheArticles5,6and7oftheRules.

According to the article 5.1 of the Rules, Rotterdam Rules will be applied to the

contracts of international marine shipping. The contract of carriage is defined in

Article1oftheRulesasacontractwhereacarrierpromisestotransportgoodsby

seafromoneplacetoanotherinreturntothepayment.However,theproblemmay

arise if the goods are carriage by seawithout any contract; in this case, whether

RotterdamRuleswillbeappliedornot.TakingclearwordingoftheRotterdamRules,19VimarSegurosyReaseguros,S.A.v.M/VSkyReefer,515U.S.528,537,1995AMC1817,1824(1995)20MalcolmClarke,MaritimeLawEvolving,(A&CBlack,2014)<books.google.com>accessedon13December201521Article4.1oftheRotterdamRules

9

apresumptioncanbemadethatsincethescopeoftheRotterdamRuleslimitedto

the contract of carrier, actual carriage o goods cannot be considered within the

scopeoftheRotterdamRules.22

Itisimportanttostatethatoneofthemostprominentmodificationsbroughtby

theRotterdamRules is scopeof theapplicationwhich is extended to thedoor-to-

doortransport.23Inthisrespect,therulesareconsideredtobeapplieddoor-to-door

transportation. Hence, the Rotterdam Rules are prepared to cover multimodal

transport.24ItisabreakoutfromHague,Hague-VisbyRuleswhichapplyonlytackle-

to-tackle transport and Hamburg Rules that applied only to the port-to-port

transport.25However, it is observed thatmultimodal liability regimesmight create

somedifficulties.Forexample, in regard to transportationwithcontainer, itwould

be challenging to identify when the damages happened.26Moreover, it should be

indicatedthattherearealreadydifferentregimestoregulateroadandrailcarriage.

If road and rail carriages are not replaced by the newmultimodal regimes, there

might be additional problems.27 On the other hand, it should be taken into

consideration that soas toensureandsecureunity, certaintyandpredictability, it

makes sense to have a single legal regime to cover the entire transportation.28

Nevertheless,asamatteroffact,RotterdamRulesarenotappliedtothetransports

whichdonothaveatleastonesealeg.Itisworthtopointoutthatthelengthofthe

sealegisnotimportantandinanycaseRotterdamRuleswillbeapplicable.29Inthis

respect,RotterdamRulesdoesnotsetoutfullmultimodalsystemwhichincludesall

meansoftransportbutestablishingasystemdefinedas“maritimeplus.”30Finally,it

22Nikaki&Soyer,30323Article5oftheRotterdamRules24JürgenBasedow,UlrichMagnus,RüdigerWolfrum,TheHamburgLecturesonMaritimeAffairs2011-2013,(Springer,2014)2725KofiMbiah,‘UpdatingtheRulesonInternationalCarriageofGoodsbySea:TheRotterdamRules’,(committeemaritime.org)<http://www.comitemaritime.org/Uploads/Rotterdam%20Rules/Paper%20of%20Kofi%20Mbiah.pdf>accessedon19December201526PaulTodd,PrinciplesoftheCarriageofGoodsbySea,(Routledge,2015)Chapter2127Ibid,chapter2128MichaelF.Sturley,TheUNCITRALCarriageofGoodsConvention:ChangestoExistingLaw,2007-08(COMITÉMAR.INT’L,Y.B.,2008)25729YvonneBaatzandothers,TheRotterdamRules:APracticalAnnotation,(CRCPress,2013)1630KateLannan,‘TheLaunchoftheRotterdamRules’,(shhsfy.gov.cn)<www.shhsfy.gov.cn/hsinfoplat/...42/.../20.doc>accessedon20December2015

10

canbeaddedthatdoor-to-doortransport isappliedincasewhichpartieshavenot

decidedonthecontrary. Inhis respect,shipperandcarriercandecidetohavethe

port-to-port or the tackle-to-tackle transport instead of the door-to-door

transport.31

The Rotterdam Rules contains quite a few reforms in regards to the

accountability of the carrier. In general, it is noted that liability of the carrier has

beenexpandedundertheRotterdamRules.RotterdamRulesdescribescarrierasa

person that establishes an agreement of carriage with a shipper.32In this regard,

carrier is required to transport the goods to the place of destination and deliver

themtotheshipper.33Itshouldbenotedconsideringthatthecarrier isnotalways

be the party performing the service, theRotterdam rules presented the notion of

“performingparty”whichisdefinedaspersonwhoisnotnecessarilythecarrierbut

promisetotakeovercarriersresponsibilitiesunderthecontractofcarriage.34Since

RotterdamRulesadopteddoor-to-doortransportmodel,theperiodofresponsibility

of the carrier is regulated in accordance to this model. To that end, period of

responsibilityofthecarrierorperformingpartystartswiththereceiptofthegoods

andendswiththedeliveryofthegoods.35

Article14(a)requirescarriertoprovidenecessarycaretomaketheshiptobe

abletodeliverthegoodsunderthecontractofcarriage.Neverthelesstheobligation

shouldcoverbefore,atthebeginningofandduringtheseatravel.36Accordingtothe

Article13(1)oftheRotterdamRules,thecarrieralsohasdutytoload,handle,pack,

transport,keep,maintain,unloadanddeliverthegoodsinaappreciateandcautious

manner.

Liability of carrier for loss, damages and delay in delivery regulated under

Chapter 5 of the RotterdamRules. It should be pointed out that delay in delivery

werenotincludedintheHague-VisbyRules.Ingeneral,thecarrierwillbeheldliable31TheCMIInternationalWorkingGroupontheRotterdamRules,‘QuestionsandAnswersonTheRotterdamRules’,2009,(dutchcivillaw.com)http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/legislation/Rotterdam%20Rules.pdf>accessedon15December201532Article1.5oftheRotterdamRules33Article11oftheRotterdamRules34LachmiSingh,TheLawofCarriageofGoodsbySea,(A&CBlack,2012)21135Article11oftheRotterdamRules36Article14oftheRotterdamRules

11

iftheclaimantcansubstantiatethatthelossordamagehappenedwhilethegoods

were under the carrier’s control.37Carrier will not be held responsible if it is

demonstratedthatthelossordamageordelayindeliveryfallundertheexceptions

listedinthearticle17(3).Inaddition,attentionshouldbepaidthatRotterdamRules

did not include the exception that damages or loss were because of the carrier’s

nauticalfaultortoitsfault inthemanagementoftheshipasstatedinarticleIVof

theHague-VisbyRules.Inaddition,HagueandHague-VisbyRuleshadwiderdefined

the exception for “fire, unless caused by the actual fault or privity of the carrier”

whileRotterdamRulesincorporateditwithrestrictiondefinedas“fireontheship”

intheRotterdamRules.

Itshouldbenotedthattherestrictionlevelsofthecarriersliabilityhasbeen

raisedtothe875SDRsperpackage,and3SDRsperkilogram.38

Itisessentialtohighlightthatpreviousinternationalconventionshavemainly

paid attention to the obligations of the carrier to shipper. On the contrary, the

RotterdamRulesregulatestheobligationsoftheshipperunderChapter7.However,

it isalso stated that thegrowth in thenumberof theprovisionsdonotconstitute

additional liabilities for the shipper39. Rotterdam Rules bring an obligation to the

shipper to provide the goods in a circumstance in which they can resist to sea

transportandthisdutycovers loading,handling,stowing, lashingandsecuringand

unloading of the goods40. The Hague-Visby rules and Hamburg rules do not force

shippertoprovidethegoodsinasuitableshapeforseacarriage.Ontheotherhand,

carrieriscoveredunderexcepteddangerofinadequatepacking.Whenthecontainer

loadedbytheshipper,thegoodsshouldbeloadedandstowedcarefullyinordernot

to harm any property or person.41Article 28 of the Rotterdam Rules governs the

obligation of the shipper and carrier to collaborate with each other and provide

informationessentialtoassistthepropertransportationofthegoods.Itissignificant

tomention that informationshouldbeprovided ina timelymanner.42It shouldbe

37Article17(1)and(2)oftheRotterdamRules38Article49oftheRotterdamRules39TheCMIInternationalWorkingGroupontheRotterdam,2009,ibid,1540Article27oftheRotterdamRules41Article27oftheRotterdamRules42Article29oftheRotterdamRules

12

indicated that there are not corresponding provisions to article 28 and 29 in the

Hague-Visby and Hamburg rules but these provisions are as consequence of the

consideration of the widely accepted exercise. Article 30 of the Rotterdam Rules

confirms that the carrier is obliged to prove that the shipper has breached his

obligationsunderthecontract.

Rotterdam Rules also contains provisions in regard to the transport of

dangerousgoodsbyseaandbringsomeobligationstotheshipper.43Similartothe

Hague-VisbyandHamburgRulesshipperhavetonotifythecarrierandmarkorlabel

such goods. Nevertheless, Rotterdam Rules advances this and point out that this

shouldbedoneaccordingtoanyregulationsorrequestsofthepublicadministration

whichareobligedtobeappliedduringtheshipment.44Ifshipperfailstocomplywith

obligationregardingtheshipmentofdangerousgoods,hewouldberesponsiblefor

thedamagesandlosses.45

Generally, the provision of the Rotterdam Rules in regard to the shippers’

liabilityhasbeenreceivedwithapositiveapproach.Itisstressedthatprovisionsare

not complex and well-structured so as to protect the interests of the carrier and

shipperthereforebalancedaswellasholdsthegeneralprinciplethatshipperwould

beheldaccountableonlyforfaultandthedutytoprovewillbeontheshouldersof

thecarrier.46

It is essential to call attention to that Article 80 of the Rules provide

exceptiontothescopeoftheapplicationoftheRotterdamRules.Article80ofthe

Rotterdam Rules states that carrier is permitted to decide that Rotterdam Rules

wouldnotbeappliedbyhavingavolumecontractwithashipper.Volumecontractis

definedasacontractofcarriagewhichallowsforthetransportofidentifiedquantity

ofgoodsinaseriesofshipmentsduringafixedperiodoftime.47Itmeansthatlarge

number of international transport contracts will be able to escape from the

RotterdamRulesbasedon theprincipleof freedomofcontractapproach.There is

43Article31oftheRotterdamRules44Singh,17845Article32oftheRotterdamRules46JürgenBasedow,UlrichMagnus,RüdigerWolfrum,TheHamburgLecturesonMaritimeAffairs2011-2013,3947Article1oftheRotterdamRules

13

alsoapossibilitythatInfluentialshippersandcarriersmaytendtorelyonarticle80

oftheRotterdamRules.Itisregardedasanacceptablewithdrawalfromthelawasit

hasappliedsincetheHagueRuleswhichweredrafted80yearsago.48

Consideringthedevelopmentonelectroniccommercesinceadoptionofthe

Hague, Hague-Visy and Hamburg Rules, Rotterdam Rules contains provisions

regardingtheuseofelectronictransportrecordsandprovidesanoperational legal

outlinewhichisbasedonimprovementofelectronictradeinmarineshipping.49

AccordingtotheRotterdamRules,thetimeperiodforbringingaclaimtothe

arbitration or law suit to the court is two years, which is similar to the Hamburg

Rules.50ThisperiodistwicelongerthanthetimeindicatedintheHagueandHague-

Rules.Theperiodstartsonthedayofdeliveryorthelastdayinwhichthegoodsare

supposedtobedelivered.

Taking into account that Rotterdam Rules adopt reasonable elements of the

previous Rules and bringing new provisions and solution in respect to the

shortcomingsofthepreviousrules,theyhaveproducedanoriginalstructureforthe

marinetransport.51

5. TheviewsinfavourofRotterdamRules

EuropeanUnionParliamentadoptedaResolutionin2010onplannedobjectives

andrecommendationsfortheUnion’smarineshippingprogrammeuntil2018.52 In

the resolution,member states are invited to adopt and implement theRotterdam

Rules promptly. In addition, The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), the

European Community Shipowners’ Associations (ECSA), BIMCO and the World

Shipping Council (WSC) demonstrated their support as Rotterdam Rules set out

48Basedow,Magnus,Wolfrum,2849Chapter3oftheRotterdamRules50Article62oftheRotterdamRules51SiYuzhou,HenryHaili,‘NewStructureoftheBasisoftheCarrier'sLiabilityundertheRotterdamRules’,(2009),14Unif.L.Rev.93152StrategicgoalsandrecommendationsfortheEU’smaritimetransportpolicyuntil2018EuropeanParliamentresolutionof5May2010onstrategicgoalsandrecommendationsfortheEU’smaritimetransportpolicyuntil2018(2009/2095(INI))(2010)<http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52010IP0128>accessedon19December2015

14

international uniformity for maritime and multimodal transport in favour of the

internationalmarineshipping.53

Moreover, the US Maritime Law Association assisted and supported the USA

representativesduringthedebateforpreparationoftheConvention.Inthisrespect,

MaritimeLawAssociationhasurgedtheUSSenatetoaccepttheConvention.Firstof

all,theassociationhasemphasisedthatcurrentlymarineshippingisadministeredby

severalsystemsandthus,theAssociationadvocatedinfavourofacceptanceofthe

Rules since theywouldprovide consistencyandcertainty in regards to themarine

transport.54Taking into account that the existing regimes are subject to each

nation’s interpretation, it is not possible to provide uniformity under current

regimes.55Secondly, it is indicatedthattheRotterdamRulesareevolutionarysince

Rulesbasedon thecurrentlyexiting regimesandaims tounifyandmodernise the

existing Rules.56Thirdly, it is expressed that since Rotterdam Rules regulates the

door-to-door transport there will be one regime to covers the entire period57.

Fourthly,itisarguedthatportcongestionwouldbeenhanced,sincetheRotterdam

Rules ensures terminals and carriers several choices for keeping the uncollected

shipmentoutsidetheport.Finally,itishighlightedthattheRotterdamrulestakeinto

account e-commerce and provide provisions to facilitate use of electronic

documents.58Indeed, it is awidely accepted fact that there have been numerous

technologicalchangesanddevelopmentswhichaffectseashipping.Itisobviousthat

havingaunifiedcomprehensivesetofrulesincludingtheprovisionsone-commerce

wouldbebenefitofallstates.

6. TheviewsagainsttheRotterdamRules53UNCITRAL,‘ICS/ECSA/BIMCO/WSCPressRelease,TheRotterdamRules,WideSupportbyStatesatSigningCeremonyinRotterdam’(unicitral.org)<http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/news/ICS_ECSA_BIMCO_WSC_press_release.pdf>accessedon12December201554MaritimeLawAssociationofTheUnitedStatesTortTrialandInsurancePracticeSection,SectionofInternationalLawReporttotheHouseofDelegates,2009,(americanbar.org)<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/UN_Rotterdam_Rules_2.authcheckdam.pdf>accessedon16December201555MaritimeLawAssociation2009,ibid56MaritimeLawAssociation,2009,ibid57MaritimeLawAssociation,2009,ibid58MaritimeLawAssociation,2009,ibid

15

SomeopposetotheratificationofRotterdamRules,astheyareworriedthatthe

Contention might increase their exposure to liability. For example, Canadian

transportlawyerssuggestedCanadanottosigntheConvention.59Canadianlawyers,

firstofall,raisedtheissueofvolumecontractsincetheyarewidelydescribed.It is

statedthathighusageofvolumecontractswouldpreventuniformityinthemarine

transport.60Secondly,itisnotedthattheexemptionstothedoor-to-doortransport

aretoowidethattheywouldprovideanysolutiontotheissueofinternalliabilityin

different countries.61 Furthermore, it is highlighted that some provisions can be

decided not be applied such as the choice of forum provisions. In this respect,

Canadianlawyersarguedthatstandardisationoflawonmarinetransportwouldnot

beaccomplished.Thirdly, it isemphasized that liability regimeof theRotterdam is

meaningfullydifferentfromcurrentliabilityregimes.Finally,itisunderlinedthatthe

Convention is lengthy, detailed, complex and difficult to comprehend. Therefore,

interpretations of Rotterdamwould differ between countries that ratified it. As a

matter of fact, the number of countries signed the Convention represent small

portion and they are not the biggest maritime countries. In this respect, it is

generallyacceptedthatuniformitycannotbeensurediftheRotterdamRulesarenot

adopted by the powerful maritime countries such as United Kingdom, Germany,

Australia,USAetc.62Moreover, theRotterdamRulesestablisheda liability regime,

which isdifferentthanHague,Hague-VisbyandHamburgRulesand if theyarenot

widelyadoptedbythemaritimecountries,itwouldcreateanotherliabilityregime.

BesidesCanadiantransport lawyers,“TheEuropeanShippers’Council(ESC)”

thatrepresentsthebenefitsofthearound100.000transportcompaniesstatedthat

theyareagainsttheRotterdamRules.63TheCouncilstressedthatalthoughthereare

59CanadianTransportLawyers’AssociationConference,UpdateontheUnitedNationsConventiononContractsfortheInternationalCarriageofGoodsWhollyorPartlybySea(“Rotterdam”)TheEffectofRotterdamonCanadianCargoClaims,October2,2009,(ahbla.ca)<http://www.ahbl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Presentation_on_Rotterdam_Rules-Douglas_Schmitt-October2009.pdf>accessedon16December201560CanadianTransportLawyers’AssociationConference,2009,ibid61CanadianTransportLawyers’AssociationConference,2009,ibid62CanadianTransportLawyers’AssociationConference,2009,ibid63ViewoftheEuropeanShippers’CouncilontheConventiononContractsfortheInternationalCarryingofGoodsWhollyorPartlybySeaalsoknownasthe‘RotterdamRules’(2009)<<https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/transport/rotterdam_rules/ESC_PositionPaper_March2009.pdf>accessedon20December2015

16

a few useful point for shippers in the Rotterdam Rules, they are misleading and

arguedthatRotterdamRuleswouldnotcreateagoodsituationfortheshippersand

theirpositionwouldbeworsethanpre-1924Hagueliabilityregime.64

TheMinistry of Transport of the Chinese government conducted industrial

assessmenton theeffect of theRotterdamRuleson the shipping industry, largely

stated owned, and it is concluded that Rotterdam Rules had altered the

responsibilitysystemofcarriersremoving“theerrorsinnavigations”and“firefault

exemption”;extendingthedutyofseaworthinessthroughtheentiretransportand

growingthelimitationofliabilitysignificantlyandthiswouldescalateanintolerable

riskand imposeanenormousweightontoChina’s shippingcompanies thatwillbe

regardedagainstthegrowthofChina’smarinecommercialnavyandhercompetitive

positionintheinternationalshippingmarket.65

Prof.TetleyalsosuggestedthattheConventionshouldnotberatified.Hestated

thatRotterdamrulesareverylongandcomplexthatevenmostexperiencedpeople

inthemarineshippingwouldhavedifficultytounderstand.Moreimportantly,Tetley

notedthatRotterdamRulesarenotcarriageactoramultimodalactbutacontracts

actanditisanoriginalandunacquaintedapproach.Furthermore,heunderlinedthat

theRotterdamRules containmanydifferentactsnot simply transportofgoodsby

seasuchasapartialbillsofladingact,apartialon-carriageactetc.ınaddition,itis

stipulated that multiple exceptions as well are made to explicit rules. As other

commentators Tetley argued that volume contracts are too broadly defined. In

additiontothese,itisnotedthatmultipleoptingoutsaremadetoexplicitrules.66In

this respect, Tetley argued that the United Nations General Assembly send

RotterdamRulesbacktoUNCITRALWorkingGroupforreconsideration67.

64ViewoftheEuropeanShippers’Council,2009,ibid65Yuzhuo&Jinlei,ibid66WilliamTetley,‘SummaryofSomeGeneralCriticismsoftheUNCITRALConvention(TheRotterdamRules)’,(PreliminaryobservationsofWilliamTetley,Nov.5,2008)2008,(mcgill.ca)<http://www.mcgill.ca/files/maritimelaw/Tetley_Criticism_of_Rotterdam_Rules.pdf>accessedon17December201567Tetley,ibid,

17

7. Conclusion

TheRotterdamRulesaim toenhancepredictability, certainlyanduniformityof

the legislationoninternationalmarineshipping. Inthisregard,Rulescontainsclear

provisionsregardingthedefinitionofthemostimportantconcepts,theinterestand

liabilities of the shippers and carriers. Despite the deficiencies such as broad

descriptionof thevolumecontractetc. thereareanumberof reasonsbelieving in

that iftheRotterdamRulesreceiveworldwideacceptance,especiallybythestrong

maritimecountriessuchasUSA,UKandbigregionalorganisationssuchasEuropean

Union,theywillachievetobringuniformityandcertaintyandmodernisethelawon

marineshipping.Itisobviousthatthereisaneedtounifythelegislationonmarine

shippingsincetherearethreedifferentregimesatpresent.Inordertoimproveand

make acceptable the Rotterdam Rules they can be sent back to the UNCITRAL

WorkingGroupforreassessment.

18

References

AdmiraltyandMaritimeLawGuide,‘InternationalConventionfortheUnificationofCertain Rules of Law relating to Bills of Lading ("Hague Rules"), and Protocol ofSignature’(admiraltylawguide.com)

<http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/haguerules1924.html>accessedon12December2015

AdmiraltyandMaritimeLawGuide,‘InternationalConventionfortheUnificationofCertain Rules of Law relating to Bills of Lading ("Hague Rules"), and Protocol ofSignature’(admiraltylawguide.com)

<http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/haguerules1924.html>accessedon12December2015

BaatzYandothers,TheRotterdamRules:APracticalAnnotation,(CRCPress,2013)

BasedowJ,MagnusU,WolfrumR,TheHamburgLecturesonMaritimeAffairs2011-2013(Springer,2014)

BerlingieriF,‘TheHistoryoftheRotterdamRules’ed.GünerM.D-Özbek,TheUnitedNationsConventiononContracts for the InternationalCarriageofGoodsWhollyorPartly by Sea:AnAppraisal of the "RotterdamRules" (Springer Science&BusinessMedia2011)

CanadianTransportLawyers’AssociationConference,‘UpdateontheUnitedNationsConventiononContractsfortheInternationalCarriageofGoodsWhollyorPartlybySea (“Rotterdam”)TheEffectofRotterdamonCanadianCargoClaims’,October2,2009, (ahbla.ca) <http://www.ahbl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Presentation_on_Rotterdam_Rules-Douglas_Schmitt-October2009.pdf>accessedon16December2015

ClarkeM,MaritimeLawEvolving(A&CBlack2014)<books.google.com>accessedon13December2015

CMI,Status(commitemaritime.org)

19

<http://www.comitemaritime.org/Uploads/pdf/CMI-SRMC.pdf> accessed on 12December2015

FariaJAE,UniformLawforInternationalTransportatUNCITRAL:NewTimes,NewPlayers,andNewRules,(2009),TexasInternationalLawJournal,vol.44,279

FredrickDC, ‘Political participation and legal reform in the internationalmaritimerulemakingprocess:fromtheHaguerulestotheHamburgrules’,(1991),JournalofMaritimeLawandCommerce,vol.22,no.1,81

Hasan Z, Ismail N, ‘TheWeakness of the Hague Rules and the extend of ReformsmadebytheHagueVisbyRules’,(fd.unl.pt)

<http://www.fd.unl.pt/docentes_docs/ma/wks_MA_20177.pdf> accessed on 12December2015

LannanK,‘TheLaunchoftheRotterdamRules’,(shhsfy.govv.cn)

<www.shhsfy.gov.cn/hsinfoplat/...42/.../20.doc>accessedon20December2015

Maritime Law Association of The United States Tort Trial and Insurance PracticeSection, Section of International Law Report to the House of Delegates, 2009,(americanbar.org)<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/UN_Rotterdam_Rules_2.authcheckdam.pdf>accessedon16December2015

Mbiah K, ‘Updating the Rules on International Carriage of goods by sea: TheRotterdamRules’,(committeemaritime.org)

<http://www.comitemaritime.org/Uploads/Rotterdam%20Rules/Paper%20of%20Kofi%20Mbiah.pdf>accessedon19December2015

MyburghP,'UniformityorUniletarismintheLawofCarriageofGoodsbySea'(2000)31(1)VUWLR,355

Nikaki T, Soyer B, A New International Regime for Carriage of Goods by Sea:Contemporary,Certain,InclusiveANDEfficient,orJustAnotherOnefortheShelves?,(2012)30BerkeleyJ.Int'lLaw.303

<http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/bjil/vol30/iss2/2> accessed on 13 December2015

20

SinghL,TheLawofCarriageofGoodsbySea(A&CBlack2012)

Smart H M J,United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea: 1978(HamburgRules):ExplanatoryDocumentation(CommonwealthSecretariat,1989)

Strategic goals and recommendations for the EU’smaritime transport policy until2018 European Parliament resolution of 5 May 2010 on strategic goals andrecommendationsfortheEU’smaritimetransportpolicyuntil2018(2009/2095(INI))(2010) <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52010IP0128 >accessedon19December2015

SturleyMF,TheUNCITRALCarriageofGoodsConvention:ChangestoExistingLaw,2007-08(COMITÉMAR.INT’L,Y.B.2008)

RotterdamRules,Introduction,(rotterdamrules.com)

<http://www.rotterdamrules.com/content/introduction>accessedon13December2015

Tetley, Summary of Some General Criticisms of the UNCITRAL Convention (TheRotterdamRules), (PreliminaryobservationsofWilliamTetley,Nov.5,2008)2008,(mcgill.ca)<http://www.mcgill.ca/files/maritimelaw/Tetley_Criticism_of_Rotterdam_Rules.pd>accessedon17December2015

The CMI International Working Group on the Rotterdam Rules, ‘Questions andAnswers on The Rotterdam Rules’, 2009, (dutchcivillaw.com)<http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/legislation/Rotterdam%20Rules.pdf> accessed on15December2015

ToddP,PrinciplesoftheCarriageofGoodsbySea,(Routledge2015)Chapter21

UNCITRAL,ReportoftheUnitedNationsCommissiononInternationalTradeLawontheworkofitstwenty-ninthsession28May-14June1996GeneralAssemblyOfficialRecords·Fifty-firstSessionSupplementNo.17(A/51/17)(uncitral.org)

<http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/206/41/PDF/N9620641.pdf?OpenElement>accessedon13December2015

21

UNCITRAL,UnitedNationsCommissiononInternationalTradeLawForty-firstsessionNewYork,16June-11July2008ReportofWorkingGroupIII(TransportLaw)ontheworkofitstwenty-firstsession(Vienna,14-25January2008)(uncitral.org)

<http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/V08/507/44/PDF/V0850744.pdf?OpenElement>accessedon13December2015

UNCITRAL, ‘ICS / ECSA / BIMCO /WSC Press Release, The RotterdamRules,WideSupportbyStatesatSigningCeremonyinRotterdam’(unicitral.org)

<http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/news/ICS_ECSA_BIMCO_WSC_press_release.pdf>accessedon12December2015

UNCITRAL, ‘Status, United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea(Hamburg,1978)(uncitral.org)

<http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/transport_goods/Hamburg_status.html>,accessedon12December2015

UNCITRAL, Status United Nations Convention on Contracts for the InternationalCarriageofGoodsWhollyorPartlybySea(NewYork,2008)(uncitral.org)

http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/transport_goods/rotterdam_status.html>accessedon12December2015

UnitedNations,'ResolutionadoptedbytheGeneralAssembly[onthereportoftheSixthCommittee(A/63/438)](Uncitral.org,2008)

<http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/workinggroups/wg_3/res122e.pdf> accessed12December2015

UnitedNations, ‘ResolutionadoptedbytheGeneralAssemblyonthereportof theSixthCommittee(A/48/613)]!(Un.org,1978)

<https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/transport/hamburg/hamburg_rules_e.pdf>accessedon12December2015

View of the European Shippers’ Council on the Convention on Contracts for theInternational Carrying of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea also known as the‘RotterdamRules’(2009)

<https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/transport/rotterdam_rules/ESC_PositionPaper_March2009.pdf>accessedon20December2015

22

VimarSegurosyReaseguros,S.A.v.M/VSkyReefer,515U.S.528,537,1995AMC1817,1824(1995)

YuzhuoS, Jinlei Z, ‘AnAnalysis andAssessmenton theRotterdamRules inChina’sMarineIndustry’(comitemaritime.org)

<http://www.comitemaritime.org/Uploads/Rotterdam%20Rules/Paper%20of%20Prof.%20Si%20Yuzhuo%20and%20Dr.%20Zhang%20Jinlei.pdf> accessed on 19December2015

Yuzhou S, Hai li H, ‘New Structure of the Basis of the Carrier's Liability under theRotterdamRules’,2009,14Unif.L.Rev.931

EUR.PARL.DOC.A7-0114/2010(2010)