Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
It is generally assumed that the Hague-Visby Rules are silent on choice of law and forum clauses. However, Art.3(8) can potentially operate to invalidate such clauses; and the general assumption is challenged by reference to Australia’s cargo liability regime. This reality could incentivise jurisdic...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Informa Business Intelligence
2024
|
| Online Access: | https://www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=437721 http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/96232 |
| Summary: | It is generally assumed that the Hague-Visby Rules are silent on choice of law and forum clauses. However, Art.3(8) can potentially operate to invalidate such clauses; and the general assumption is challenged by reference to Australia’s cargo liability regime. This reality could incentivise jurisdictions wanting to uphold such clauses to construe the Hague-Visby Rules uniformly. Despite this, the limits of Art.3(8) should be clarified. In Australia, reform efforts should address this and other issues with arbitration agreements. As Art.3(8) currently stands, parties must consider its potential effects on dispute resolution provisions in sea-carriage documents. |
|---|