Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
THE HAMBURG RULES — A COMMENTARY
William Tetley
Q.C., Faculty of Law, McGill University, Montreal.
Introduction
Two Questions
First Question—Why the Rules are Inconsistent
I Civil Law/Common Law
II Lack of Economic Evidence
III Writing Poems by Committee
IV Uncitral Negotiating Groups
V Disparities in Experience
VI P. & I. Clubs and Underwriters
VII Compromise by Drafting
VIII Legislating by Assembly Instead of Government
IX The Good Work of Uncitral
Second Question—The Advantages and Disadvantages
I Major Advances
(1) Actual Carrier—Arts. 1(2) and 10
(2) Application of the Rules—Art. 2
(3) Obligation to Care—Art. 5(1)
(4) Responsibility of the Carrier—Art. 5(1)
(5) Per Kilo/Per Package—Art. 6
(6) Non-Contractual Claims—Art. 7
(7) Through Carriage—Art. 10
(8) Jurisdiction—Art. 21
(9) Arbitration—Art. 22
II Major Regressions in the Law
(1) Delay—Arts. 5(2) and 5(3) and 6(1 )(b)
(2) Fire—Art. 5(4)
(3) The Value of the Package or Kilo—Arts. 6 and 26
(4) Fundamental Breach—Art. 8
(5) Deck Cargo—Arts. 9 and 15(1)(m)
(6) Porte de Sortie—Art. 11
(7) Contents of the Bill of Lading—Art. 15
(8) General Average—Art. 24
III Minor Advances
(1) Dangerous Cargo—Arts. 13 and 15(1)(a)
(2) Extending the Delay for Suit—Art. 20(4)
(3) Indemnity Action—Art. 20(5)
(4) Bills of Lading in the hands of third parties—Arts. 16 and 17
01