History Of The Hague Rules

The Hague Rules are so called because the work on them commenced at a meeting of the International Law Association at The Hague in Netherlands in 1921. They were eventually adopted by a diplomatic convention at Brussels in 1924 so they are also referred to as the Brussels Convention although they are normally called the Hague Rules. They represent the first effective internationally agreed control of bill of lading terms.

Before the adoption of Hague Rules many ship-owners were undertaking no liability whatsoever. Some ship owners were apparently excluding virtually all or at a great deal of their liability. Such exclusion clause was valid which excluded all ship owners’ liability for all events including their own negligence. The only basic liability of the ship owner in regard to seaworthiness and care of cargo was not excluded unless clearly stated. The philosophy behind such minimum liability was that sea transit was a dangerous adventure at that time (usually at the time of wooden vessel). A person participating in it assumed that carrier will do the best he can therefore it is fair to excuse him of the particularly maritime as opposed to the bailee aspects of the responsibilities undertaken. The movement from wooden vessel to metal vessel gave the carriers a strong position than before. It let them to undertake some liability but the practice was not uniform. The nature and extent of liability were varied as per the negotiation between carrier and the shipper and also by the terms of the bill of lading issued by the carrier. The Hague Rules was the first attempt which put this practice in a regulatory framework.

Hague Rule was argued to bring the uniformity in bill of lading. Main argument was put forward at that time in fa...

... middle of paper ...

...them international operation. For this the party-states should enact the Rules for the outwards shipments from their ports. Any litigation on such shipment filed in the party-state would follow the Rules but when the litigation is filed in the non party state, that state is not bound to follow the Rules unless there is Clause Paramount in the Bill of Lading stating that the Rules will apply. But the problem arises when the clause paramount is omitted from the bill of lading for shipment out of a Convention Country and there is a choice of law clause for a jurisdiction. By such choice of law clause, the application of the rules may be avoided at all or for any particular voyage. Therefore the absence of the clause paramount causes the rules to be evaded. It results that the international operation of the rules at least in many countries was to some extent torpedoed.