sign in sign up
<<
Home , Rotterdam Rules

2 BRITANNIA NEWS CONVENTIONS

THE ROTTERDAM RULES IN A NUTSHELL

What are the Rotterdam Rules? The formal name of the Rotterdam Rules is the United Nations Convention for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, 2008 . The Rules were initially drafted by the Comité Maritime International , then by Uncitral. The current status of the Rules is that the text has been completed in final form and will not now be modified again. Once a convention has reached that stage, it can usually be modified only by the states parties agreeing a new Protocol (Art 95).

The Rotterdam Rules are similar to the Hague The , Hague-Visby Rules and and/or the port of loading and/or the Rules, the Hague-Visby Rules and the must be denounced by a place of delivery and/or the port of discharge Hamburg Rules in that they aim to fulfil state which signs up to the Rotterdam Rules, is in a contracting state (Art 5). roughly the same function: to secure so that in principle any one state will apply uniformity by way of predictable content in only one set of rules at any given time. The Rotterdam Rules themselves specify that contracts for the carriage of goods by sea, they apply to‘contracts of carriage’ as defined while providing a threshold level of Even if the Convention does enter into force, by Article 1. This is a deceptively simple protection to the parties to the contract of will it achieve its aim of providing uniformity description – and there are a number of carriage. To help secure uniformity, in contracts for the carriage of goods by sea? important limitations (for example, Art 6) reservations to the Rules are excluded by For that to happen, a majority of states needs which are discussed below. Article 90 and the scope for declarations is to sign up to the Convention. The 34 (as of 23 very limited (Art 91). June 2009) states that have signed up to the The Rotterdam Rules apply to contracts for Hamburg Rules, for example, constitute at carriage of goods by sea, including those When will the Rotterdam Rules enter into best a minority. The Rotterdam Rules are where the sea leg is only a minor part of the force? unlikely ever to receive the support of all carriage as a whole. The Rules apply to the The answer for now is that it is too soon to nations: some trading nations will consider it land legs of carriage and to a wide range of tell. The signing ceremony took place on 23 a competitive advantage to opt for a minority other activities before and after the sea leg September 2009. However, a signing regime in order to appear more carrier- of carriage of goods and would replace not ceremony is at best an early indication of the friendly or more -friendly than the only the Hague-Visby Rules but also the level of political support for a convention. majority. Multi- Modal Convention 1980. The familiar Until the convention enters into force, it will tackle-to- tackle rule of the Hague Rules is not be legally binding on states who have To which contracts will the Rotterdam Rules abandoned by the Rotterdam Rules whose signed it. The conditions for entry into force apply? scope is better described as‘door-to-door’ are specified by the Rotterdam Rules (Art 94): Once the Rotterdam Rules are in force, they (Art 13). The duty of the carrier begins 20 states must adopt it. They can do so by are binding on states parties. States who when the carrier receives the goods for binding signature, signature plus ratification have not signed up will not be bound. It will carriage and ends when the goods are or by accession. The 20th state to give therefore be of the utmost importance to delivered (Art 13). binding acquiescence will start the process know which states are parties to the so that when one year has passed thereafter, convention at a given time, because the Limits of application the convention becomes binding on all Rotterdam Rules apply where, according to The scope of application of the Rotterdam states parties. the , either the place of Rules overlaps with several other conventions. NUMBER 2 JULY 2010 3

Some conflicts are foreseen and catered for: document (i.e. a ) has been charterers systematically to name themselves Article 82 gives precedence to other issued and there is no or slot (or some other party) as carriers in the conventions applicable to carriage by air, charter between the parties to the contract contract of carriage. This presumption is road, rail or inland waterways which came of carriage (Art 6(2)). otherwise practically an invitation to make into force before the Rotterdam Rules. The the registered owner the first defendant to Rules will therefore apply to a finite list of Special regimes with a generally increased law suits filed near the two-year time bar, to conventions in force on the day before the freedom of contract apply to deck cargo (Art counter the risk that the claimant’s entry into force of the Rotterdam Rules. 25), live animals (Art 81(a)), special cargoes information about the identity of the carrier Furthermore, the Rotterdam Rules will not (Art 81(b)) and volume contracts (Art 80). turns out to be incomplete. A claimant may apply before loading and after discharge Article 80 allows for contracting out of the also do so in order to force the carrier to where there is another international Rotterdam Rules between the carrier and the supply information about the identity of convention that applies to those phases of shipper in volume contracts, providing it is other potential carriers. the carriage (Art 26). This can be any done‘prominently’ and the alternative terms transport convention, whether it is in force at are individually negotiated. However, this There are however other parties who may the time the Rotterdam Rules enter into force exception will only apply to a party other come to shoulder some of the liability of the or is an entirely subsequent product. Article than the contracting carrier and shipper carrier and for whose faults the carrier may 26 applies only where no part of the loss, where the conditions in Article 80(5) are be liable. damage or delay is attributable to the sea leg fulfilled. Those conditions are aimed at and on three conditions, which must all be ensuring that the other party knew of and The carrier and other performing parties present. The other convention: consented to the derogating terms. The carrier’s liability extends to breaches of i) must be mandatory in the sense that it its obligations under the Rotterdam Rules cannot be departed from by contract; No contracting out (further below) caused by the acts or ii) must specifically provide for the carrier’s According to Article 79, any term in a omissions of performing parties, master and liability, limitation of liability and time bar; contract of carriage is void to the extent that crew, employees and employees of a and it conflicts with the Rotterdam Rules. The performing party as well as‘any other person iii) must be capable of regulating the loss, parties cannot contract out of the Rules, that performs or undertakes to perform any damage or delay in question. either in favour of the shipper, or in favour of of the carrier’s obligations under the contract the carrier. of carriage, to the extent that the person acts, There cannot be any conflict between either directly or indirectly, at the carrier’s Articles 82 and 26: they will by definition DUTIES OF THE CARRIER request or under the carrier’s supervision or apply to different conventions. Article 26 will Who is the carrier? control’ (Art 18(d)). apply to any convention that does not fall A carrier is defined simply as‘a person who under Article 82, which is a finite and defined enters into a contract of carriage with a It is necessary to address briefly the number settled on the date before entry into shipper’; and a shipper is‘a person who Rotterdam Rules’ concepts of‘performing force of the Rotterdam Rules. enters into a contract of carriage with a parties’ and‘maritime performing parties’. carrier’ (Art 1(5) and (8)). Performing parties (defined in Art 1(6)) are The Rotterdam Rules do not apply to essentially the carrier’s subcontractors of any or to slot charters in liner When the contract of carriage does not name kind: they are persons other than the carrier transportation (Art 6(1)), contracts for the a carrier, there is a presumption that the who perform or undertake to perform any of carriage of and their luggage (Art registered owner is the carrier and, if he is the carrier’s obligations in relation to the 85), and do not affect tonnage limitation (Art sued within the time bar, the claimant may goods, directly or indirectly at the carrier’s 83) under, say, the 1976 Limitation thereafter modify the law suit by adding request or under the carrier’s supervision or Convention and its 1996 Protocol, general further parties; see under‘Time bars’ below. control – a definition capable of average (Art 84) or nuclear incidents (Art 86). Given that this is an exception to the time bar encompassing a fairly large circle of In non-liner transportation, they apply to the of two years, registered owners of ships individuals. contract of carriage only when a transport would be wise to encourage their bareboat 4 BRITANNIA NEWS CONVENTIONS

These‘performing parties’ do not become The Rotterdam Rules are generally rather Electronic transport documents directly liable under the Rotterdam Rules, but formalistic in relation to documents. Article 3 Electronic transport records are defined in they may naturally incur liabilities under provides that notices, confirmation, consent, Article 1(18) as‘information in one or more some other legal framework. If a performing agreement, declarations and other messages issued by electronic party is liable under some such other legal communications under the convention must communication under a contract of carriage framework, the carrier is not vicariously liable be in writing (including electronic writing). by a carrier’ that‘evidences the carrier’s or a by virtue of the Rotterdam Rules; the liability Other articles list the precise contents of a performing party’s receipt of goods under a of the carrier is based on the Rotterdam Rules particular document. For instance, Article 36 contract of carriage and evidences or and for breaches that result from the acts or provides a detailed list of information that contains a contract of carriage’. omissions of these third parties. the transport document must contain. While currently existing regimes are ‘Maritime performing parties’ are‘performing What is a transport document? essentially focused on the liability regime, parties’ that carry out any of the carrier’s What type of document is the carrier obliged the Rotterdam Rules have wider ambitions. obligations in relation to the goods, from the to issue under the Rules? The Rotterdam Rules They are a forward-looking product in that point in time of the arrival of the goods at the completely avoid the use of the well-known they also cover electronic data interchange, port of loading until their departure from the categorisation into bills of lading, sea provide detailed regulation of the use of port of discharge (Art 1(7)). By way of and so forth in favour of their own terminology. electronic transport documents (negotiable example, would obviously qualify There are two main groups of transport and non-negotiable) and attempt to provide as a maritime performing party, unless documents: the negotiable transport a workable, harmonised framework in retained by the shipper. A document and the non-negotiable transport support of a future of paperless trading. who carries the goods on a land leg would document (and the electronic transport qualify, if it also handles the goods within the record – more on that below). Duties in relation to the goods port area. Unlike‘performing parties,’ a The carrier’s duties in relation to the goods ‘maritime performing party’ is liable on the At first glance it would seem that the are not radically different from those under same terms as the contractual carrier, with abandonment of familiar categories such as regimes such as the Hamburg Rules and the the same defences and limits. They are bill of lading and sea is a recipe for Hague-Visby Rules. The way liability arises subject to more or less the same liabilities as confusion – however it is also reasonable to and is proven by the parties is set out in the carrier: provided some part of their imagine that by the time the Rules enter into Article 17 in a complex but logical structure. performance was carried out in a contracting force, new forms for transport documents will The starting point is that the carrier is liable state and the damage to the cargo is related have been developed that state for any loss, damage or delay arising during to their part of the performance of the unambiguously to which of the Rotterdam the period of its responsibility (Art 17(1)). The carriage contract (Art 19). Rules categories they belong and, perhaps, period of responsibility is defined as from even which articles of the Rules are intended receipt to delivery (Art 13). Where the carrier and a maritime performing to apply. party are both liable under the convention, Once the claimant has proven that the loss, liability is joint and several (Art 20). The concept of‘transport documents’ is damage or delay occurred during that based on the familiar notions of the‘contract period, the carrier may avoid liability either Duty to issue a transport document of carriage function’ and the‘receipt function’. by proving that the cause of the loss, damage There is a general duty on the carrier to issue Thus far the logic is clear and the division or delay was not attributable to its fault (Art a transport document (Art 35). However, into negotiable and non-negotiable 17(2)), or by proving that the cause of the there is no duty to issue a transport transport documents is fairly logical. loss was one of those listed in Article 17(3). document where the parties have agreed not However the provisions dealing with delivery That list is more or less that found in Article IV to use a transport document or it is the are very complex; more on that below (under r 2 of the Hague-Visby Rules, starting with Act practice of the trade not to use one. ‘Delivery without production’). of God. NUMBER 2 JULY 2010 5

If the carrier succeeds in proving that one of Delay of the voyage but throughout; although, those listed events was the cause of the loss, The carrier is liable not just for loss or damage unlike many other aspects of the carrier’s the ball is once again in the claimant’s court. but also for delay. As seen, that liability is set duties, it applies only to the sea voyage. The claimant then has three options: out together with the other liabilities in i) it may prove (Art 17(4)) that the carrier was relation to the goods in Article 17 and follows Carrier’s liability for the fault of‘performing at fault in relation to the exclusion that it has the same rules and exceptions. However, there parties’ proven under Article 17(3); or is also a definition of delay in Article 21 which The carrier is liable for breach of these duties ii) it may prove that there is another is interesting in that it makes the Rotterdam when they result from the act or omission of contributing cause not listed in Article 17(3) Rules regime for delay potentially quite a performing party, the employees of the and, if so, it is once again the carrier’s turn to favourable to the carrier. Delay occurs only carrier itself or of a performing party, the prove that it was not at fault in relation to when the shipper and the carrier have agreed , master or crew of the ship or indeed‘any that contributing cause; or expressly or by implication, that delivery is to other person that performs or undertakes to iii) the claimant may prove that the loss, take place by a certain date. It is therefore perform any of the carrier’s obligations under damage or delay was due to reasonable to assume that carriers will adopt the contract of carriage’ when that person unseaworthiness (Art 17(5)). If the claimant the precaution of expressly negating any acts on the request of the carrier or under the succeeds in proving a lack of , implied commitment to a particular delivery carrier’s supervision or control (Art 34). the carrier’s last option is to prove that the date in the contract of carriage. If there is no lack of seaworthiness did not cause the loss, agreed delivery date, liability for delay will DUTIES OF THE SHIPPER or else that it exercised due diligence. not arise. Who is the shipper? The liabilities and duties of the shipper are It should be noted that, if there is more than Crucially, the receiver of the goods must give gathered in Chapter 7 of the Rotterdam Rules. one cause of loss, damage or delay, and the notice to the carrier of loss caused by delay The duties of the shipper apply, apart from to carrier is liable only for one of them, liability is within 21 days or will lose the right to the person who enters into the contract of to be apportioned accordingly (Art 17(6)). compensation (Art 23(4)). carriage with the carrier, also to a character called the‘documentary shipper’, defined as‘a Some main differences compared to existing Exclusions person, other than the shipper, that accepts liability regimes are discussed below. The list of exclusions in Article 17(3) is similar to be named as shipper in the transport to the long list established by case law over document’ (Art 1(9)). The duties, liabilities and Duty of care of the goods the centuries, starting with . The defences of the documentary shipper are In keeping with the expansion of the ambit main novelties are the elimination of the those of the shipper (Art 33). The shipper is also of the Rotterdam Rules beyond the tackle-to- errors in‘navigation’ or‘management of the liable for losses arising from the actions of tackle period, the carrier is also responsible ship’ defences. The absence of the navigation employees, subcontractors and others (Art 34). under the Rules for delivery, which has been defence could have a significant effect in included in the list of the carrier’s obligations increasing carrier liabilities – especially in the Oddly, the definition of documentary to‘properly and carefully receive, load, context of collision claims. shipper refers not simply to‘a person handle, stow, carry, keep, care for, unload and named’ but to‘a person that accepts to be deliver’ the goods, Article 13(1). Seaworthiness named’. The unnecessary, italicised words As usual, the carrier is under a duty to exercise could feasibly cause interpretation On the other hand, there is specific provision due diligence to make the ship seaworthy problems if a person‘named’ as documentary for the possibility of the carrier and the and cargoworthy. The duty is more extensive shipper later plausibly denies having shipper to agree that the shipper, the than existing regimes in that, under the ‘accepted’ to be named, because he is documentary shipper or the is to Rotterdam Rules, it is a continuing obligation. seeking to distance himself from liability perform the loading, handling, stowing and Under Article 14, the carrier’s duty to make in relation to the shipment and the unloading of the goods, Article 13(2). the ship seaworthy arises not only at the start business relationships in question. 6 BRITANNIA NEWS CONVENTIONS

The documentary shipper is subject to the DELIVERY WITHOUT PRODUCTION handling of the goods, as long as they do not same duties as the shipper in relation for Letters of indemnity are not covered by the constitute a variation of the contract of example to dangerous goods, and if he can Rotterdam Rules and indeed would not fit carriage. The Rotterdam Rules do not clarify credibly argue that he has not‘agreed’ to be into the definition of contracts of carriage. what constitutes a‘variation’ of the contract named, he could possibly avoid liability, for Nevertheless, there are provisions which may of carriage. Different jurisdictions may well instance where something has gone wrong affect their use. A framework of provisions have different ideas in this respect, and it is with dangerous goods. In sum, if a regulates the situation when the receiver therefore especially important to remember documentary shipper plausibly denies does not have the transport document at its that the Rotterdam Rules, like any having accepted to be named, the carrier disposal. international convention, must be uniformly must revert back to the actual shipper. interpreted from country to country. The provisions on delivery are largely familiar, What are the shipper’s duties? with some exceptions. An important provision The controlling party is also entitled to Some of the shipper’s duties give rise to a for the carrier is Article 47(2), which applies to obtain delivery at a scheduled port of call or strict liability, others to fault-based liability. If negotiable transport documents and which anywhere en route in respect of a land the duty fits under Articles 31 or 32, liability is expressly states that delivery without voyage. This delivery provision means that if strict, otherwise it is fault-based. production may take place. According to this the container has been loaded for discharge provision the carrier is, in some circumstances, at one named port, the controlling party is Duties in relation to the cargo discharged from the obligation of delivering entitled to take delivery at any other port The duties of the shipper in relation to the the goods to the holder of the negotiable where the vessel is scheduled to call, before cargo are to deliver the cargo ready for transport document; namely, when no or after that port The main rule is that the carriage and to perform any FIOS duties it verifiable holder presents itself and the shipper is the controlling party, but there are may have undertaken to perform (Art 27). In carrier fails to obtain instructions from the exceptions in relation to non-negotiable relation to dangerous cargo, including legally holder of the negotiable transport document. transport documents requiring presentation dangerous cargo, the shipper must notify the The carrier may then deliver in accordance for delivery and negotiable transport carrier of its dangerous nature and furnish it with instructions from the shipper or the documents. In any case, the right of control with appropriate marks. If the shipper fails to documentary shipper, who must indemnify may be transferred as per the Rules in do so, the liability is strict. The duties under the carrier for loss arising from that delivery Articles 51 and 52. Article 27 give rise only to fault-based liability. and provide security if required. MEASURE OF LOSS Information duties This is only a brief summary of this intricate The carrier and the shipper may agree The shipper is under several different provision which is potentially of great between them in the contract of carriage on information duties under Articles 28, 29 and importance to the carrier because it provides, a manner of calculating compensation for 31. The duty under Article 28 is to exchange essentially, for a feasible cut-off point for the loss of or damage to the goods (Art 22). Such information and instructions with the carrier carrier’s responsibility for the goods. agreement will also affect the right to limit (a bilateral duty), whereas Article 29 imposes liability (Art 59(1)). a duty on the shipper to provide information, In addition, the Rotterdam Rules (Chapter 10) instructions and documents to the carrier. designate a‘controlling party’ and stipulate If they do not agree on compensation, Article These duties give rise to a fault-based liability that that party may give delivery instructions 22(2) provides for a limit to what according to Article 30. By contrast, the to the carrier. When the carrier delivers compensation the carrier may be liable to pay: shipper is also under a strict duty to provide according to those instructions, even if the carrier is to pay compensation for loss of information in relation to contract particulars delivery is not then in accordance with the or damage to the goods calculated on the (Art 31). This duty is a weighty one: not only is transport document, the carrier is absolved of commodity exchange price, or if none is liability strict, but by providing the liability (Arts 50 to 56). The controlling party, available the market price, or if there is no information, the shipper guarantees its who may or may not be a party to the market price, the normal value of goods of the accuracy. The carrier is thus entitled to rely on contract of carriage itself, is entitled to give same type and quality at the agreed place of the information provided by the shipper. instructions in respect of the care and delivery at the intended time of delivery. NUMBER 2 JULY 2010 7

TIME BARS, NOTICE OBLIGATIONS AND LIMITS Special Drawing Rights (SDR) has been provisions. Unlike the Hamburg Rules, the Time bars increased to 875. The shipper and the carrier parties’ freedom in selecting their forum According to Article 62, any action will be may agree between them on a higher under contracts of carriage is not totally time barred after two years from delivery or compensation than that provided for by the eliminated, although their enforcement by when delivery should have taken place. The Rotterdam Rules. What constitutes a‘unit’, for the parties is restricted. time bar is not subject to the suspensions or the purpose of calculating the package limit, interruptions of national law, meaning that it is given greater clarity in the Rotterdam Rules It is important to note that mere ratification is unaffected by for instance insolvency (see Art 59(2)). by a state of the Rotterdam Rules does not events, but it may be interrupted by result in its being bound by the provisions on declaration by the defendant to the claimant. There is also a special provision on limitation jurisdiction (Chapter 14) and arbitration The time bar applies both to claims by the for loss or damage caused by delay, (Chapter 15). Rather, the provisions bind only carrier against the shipper, and to claims by calculated separately in a slightly different those contracting states that make a the shipper against the carrier. Time barred manner (Art 60). While compensation for declaration to that effect (Arts 74 and 78). claims may still be used for set off. Set off is damage to or loss of the goods resulting Because of this so-called‘opt in’ system, potentially possible against any claims so this from delay follows the usual rule, liability for parties to a contract of carriage are advised is potentially a useful instrument. economic loss is separately limited to 2½ to investigate not only whether the country times the freight payable on the goods in which the dispute is brought to a court is a As mentioned above, the registered owner delayed. This is cumulative with the normal party to the Rules, but also whether it has is vulnerable to lawsuits when there is no compensation, but there is also an outside made such declarations. indication in the contract of carriage of the limit: the sum of the liability for loss of or identity of the carrier. An action against the damage to the goods due to delay and the Choice of court and place of arbitration bareboat charterer or other person identified liability due to other causes may not exceed When the Convention’s provisions on as the carrier may be instituted within the limit for total loss of the goods (Art 60). arbitration and jurisdiction are operative, the whichever is the later of two deadlines: party seeking to pursue litigation or 90 days after the rebuttal of the registered The carrier may, as ever, lose the right to limit arbitration is entitled to arbitrate or to refer owner or bareboat charterer of the liability, both for loss and for loss due to the dispute to the courts in the following presumption that he is the carrier, or the delay, if the loss was attributable to (or in the places: carrier has otherwise been identified; or case of loss due to delay, resulted from) the i) the domicile of the carrier; within the time allowed by national law in personal act or omission of the person ii) the place of receipt; or the jurisdiction of the proceedings. seeking to limit, done with the intent to iii) delivery of the goods stipulated under the cause such loss or recklessly and with contract of carriage; or The consignee’s duty under a non-negotiable knowledge that such loss would probably iv) the port where the goods are initially transport document to notify the carrier of result (Art 61). loaded on a ship or finally discharged from a any loss due to delay within 21 days has been ship (Art 66(a) and 75(2)(b)). mentioned above. Arrest The Rotterdam Rules are mainly concerned Where there is a choice of court agreement Limitation of liability with the obligations of the parties and their or an arbitration clause, the claimant will also Limitation is package limitation. The carrier substantive liabilities and do not affect have the right to initiate litigation or may limit its liability for loss caused by enforcement practice, which will remain a arbitration proceedings in the place breaches of the carrier’s obligations under matter for national law as per Article 70. designated therein (Art 66(b) and 75(2)(a)). the Rotterdam Rules, meaning any of the Arrest cannot found jurisdiction. Once a dispute has arisen, the parties are at carrier’s obligations – this is a new formula liberty to override the jurisdiction and intended to be clearer than those used in the JURISDICTION AND ARBITRATION arbitration provisions of the Rules by past (Art 59). The system bears most similarity Unlike the Hague and Hague-Visby Rules, agreeing on a court or place of arbitration to the Hamburg Rules but the number of the Rotterdam Rules contain jurisdiction (Arts 72 and 77). 8 BRITANNIA NEWS CONVENTIONS

Volume contracts Declarations of non-liability Further reading In volume contracts, jurisdiction clauses may Articles 66 and 68 determine in what courts ‘Rotterdam Rules’, United Nations be exclusive, but only if the parties so agree. an action may be commenced against the Convention for the International Carriage of The agreement must fulfil certain minimum carrier or a maritime performing party and Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, 2008 requirements as to form and the exclusivity Article 69 prohibits any other choice of court must be individually negotiated or except where the parties agree after a Preparatory works to the United Nations prominently stated. It must also clearly dispute has arisen. But what happens when a Convention for the International Carriage of designate the court or courts in question carrier or maritime performing party Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, 2008, available (Art 67(1)). requests a declaration of non-liability from a at http://www.uncitral.org court other than that provided by Article 66? In addition, under the Rotterdam Rules, there It follows from Article 71(2) that the carrier or Baatz, Y et al, The Rotterdam Rules – a is room for binding persons who are not maritime performing party must withdraw Practical Annotation (London: Informa, parties to the volume contract with exclusive the action at the request of their defendant if 2009) forum selection clauses. Such a person is that defendant wishes to exercise its right to bound by the agreement therein, but only in choice under Articles 66 or 68. Where there is Beare, S, Liability regimes: where we are, how cases where the designated court or seat of an exclusive jurisdiction clause (Art 67) or we got there, and where we are going [2002] arbitration is in one of the places identified in arbitration clause (Art 72) this provision does LMCLQ pp 306-335 Articles 66(a) and 75(2)(b) (above); the not apply. agreement is contained in the transport Diamond, A, The next sea carriage document; the third party has timely and Recognition and enforcement convention? [2008] LMCLQ pp 135-187 adequate notice of the exclusive choice of A contracting state must recognise and forum agreement; and applicable law permits enforce judgments given by the court of Sturley, M (ed), The Rotterdam Rules: The UN that the third party may be bound by the another contracting state which has Convention on Contracts for the International exclusive choice of forum agreement (Art jurisdiction pursuant to the Rotterdam Rules, Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea 67(2) and 75(4)). where both states have opted into the (London: Sweet& Maxwell, 2009) provisions on jurisdiction (Art 73). The courts Maritime performing parties of the contracting states will have the right to Thomas, RD (ed), Special issue of Journal of The Rotterdam Rules also stipulate in which refuse recognition and enforcement of International Maritime Law on the court the plaintiff can pursue litigation against judgments in accordance with the legal Rotterdam Rules (2008) 14 JIML pp 459-628 a‘maritime performing party’. The competent grounds under its own laws. courts are those having jurisdiction over the domicile of the maritime performing party Article 73 also provides an escape clause and the port where the goods are received or designed for the European Union’s Brussels delivered by the maritime performing party, Regulation 44/2001, which notably deals or the port in which the maritime performing with the enforcement of judgments: the party carries out its activities with regard to Regulation and any future successors or the goods (Art. 68). Actions against the carrier related rules will continue to govern the and the maritime performing party together enforcement of judgments as between must take place in a court that has Member States (Art 73(3)). jurisdiction over both the carrier and the maritime performing party.