The first edition of this book, published in 1982, represented the first major text to cover in depth the legal regime contained in the CMR Convention which has been part of English law since 1967 by virtue of the coming into force of the Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965. This edition now represents the most up-to-date work in the area and the likely starting point for research into the English position on the Convention, not least by those Continental lawyers keen to cite an English view. As a piece of uniform law, unlike other liability regimes on the carriage of goods such as the Hague-Visby Rules on carriage of goods by sea, the CMR Convention has a European feel and, since its operation is largely focused on Europe, there is both a need and readiness of writers and the courts to refer to Continental case law and materials. The first edition fully adopted this. Naturally it represented first, though ably considered, thoughts. This second edition represents the mature view, more than an update (although the reference to CIM 1970 on p. 2 might have been updated!), and reflective of prodigious research.

Consequently, it is considerably expanded, reflected not so much in the number of paragraphs, which have increased by two, but by the number of pages of text, increased from 164 to 528, a transformation facilitated by extensive use of subparagraphing. The text involves much new material, rewriting and some reordering. There seems now to have been more time and space to explain or develop points than the somewhat cryptic first edition. Particularly noticeable is the increased use made of German language material and the use now made of the travaux preparatoires. Unfortunately the table of abbreviations does not appear to have kept up fully, so that, unless one is in the know, it can be difficult to identify sources when armed solely with a name. Your reviewer assumes, e.g., that the references to Helm are to that author’s contribution in GrossKommentar and not to his Frachtrecht. The omissions are unfortunate and detract slightly from the tremendous asset that this important book otherwise represents. As a side point, a useful addition might be a translation of references to Continental courts, which have also been abbreviated.

Work in this area presents great difficulty for the linguistically challenged, such as your reviewer, who found the book enabled him to get far into the jurisprudence while rarely making a demand to reach for a French or German dictionary. Since the French text of the Convention is of equal authority with the English (although not set out in the Schedule to the Act—n.b. the French text is reproduced in Appendix B) argument can sometimes involve linguistic analysis (see, e.g., Buchanan & Co. v. Babco Forwarding & Shipping (U.K.) [1978] A.C. 141). There is impressive use of this at times (see, e.g., p. 177 n. 4 and p. 191) but one is sometimes surprised when such argument is not made (see, e.g., p. 509, n. 28, where the author notes an apparent limitation in Art. 29 of the Convention by use of the word “damage”, whereas the French text refers to “dommage”, which might suggest a wider sense in view of use of the word “avarie” to express physical damage, e.g., in Art. 17(1)). There are limits to such expertise and the occasional slip should not, perhaps, evoke surprise (e.g., the Belgian decision reported in (1977) 12 E.T.L. 420 in Flemish does not appear to deal with inherent vice in the sense of Art. 17(2) (see p. 364), nor does it appear to be concerned with transported containers (see p. 63)).

The developing Continental case law represents something of a bottomless pit and necessi-