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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Herbst, Shane, Allison, Simon
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
_version_ 1848766117661638656
author Herbst, Shane
Allison, Simon
author_facet Herbst, Shane
Allison, Simon
author_sort Herbst, Shane
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description 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.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T11:46:03Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-96232
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T11:46:03Z
publishDate 2024
publisher Informa Business Intelligence
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-962322024-12-16T06:49:56Z Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited Herbst, Shane Allison, Simon 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. 2024 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/96232 https://www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=437721 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4841068 Informa Business Intelligence restricted
spellingShingle Herbst, Shane
Allison, Simon
Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
title Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
title_full Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
title_fullStr Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
title_full_unstemmed Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
title_short Breaking the Hague-Visby Rule’s Silence on Choice of Law and Forum Clauses: Article 3 Revisited
title_sort breaking the hague-visby rule’s silence on choice of law and forum clauses: article 3 revisited
url https://www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=437721
https://www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=437721
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/96232