hitednatiollal Maritime Committee BULLETIN N' 'g VENICE CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 1907 President: Prof. Dr. ALB. MARGH1ERI, M. P. - DRAFT-TREATY ON LIMITATION OF SH1POWNER'S LIABILITY. - DRAFT-TREATY ON MARITIME MORTGAGES AND PRWILEGED LIENS. - CONFLICTS OF LAW AS TOFREIGHT ANT WERP PRINTED BY J-E. BUSCHMANN, REMPART DE LA PORTE DU RHIN 1909 All correspondence & communications to be addressed to: rue des Escrimeurs 28, Avtwer. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME COMMITTEE BULLETIN N° 19 VENICE CONFERENCE SEPTEY1BER 1907 SUMMARY: PAGE Preface V Resolutions of the Venice Conference . xiv Statutes of the International Maritime Committee xx Members of the International Maritime Committee xxiv National Associations XXIX List of attendants at the Conference XXXIII Agenda-paper of the Conference XL Paris Sub-Committee 3 Preliminary Reports 5r Report of the Proceedings of the Conference 437 Meeting of the Permanent Members 750 (See the Index, page 753). PREFACE Two draft-treaties of great importance, the one relating to limitation of shipowners liability and the other to mari- time mortgages and liens, were submitted for discussion to the Venice Conference. Both drafts had been conside- red at former meetings where they had been the subject of careful study and given rise to very interesting debates, in which a very great part has been taken by the most prominant jurists and business - men who from all parts of the world, had readily answered to our call. I. - Draft_ti eaty on Limitation of S1ziowners Liability.- This draft-treaty only refers to damages to goods. On account of difficulties which intil now appeared insupe- rable, the question as to damages for loss of life or personal injury has been left to the decision of the national legislations, in conforiiìity with the resolutions passed at former Conferences. The draft-treaty is based on princi- ples which, after lengthy and careful discussions, were adopted for the first time at the London Conference (1899); they represent a reasonable compromise between the legal systems of the Continent and the United States on the one side, and the British system on the other hand. The basis of that system is the limitation of the liability of the shipowner to the ship, the freight and their accessories relating to the voyage, or to their value at the end of the voyage, the shipower having the option of substituting in their stead a lump sum of £ 8 per gross ton. The great advantage of such a solution is that it would introduce iniformity in a matter in which until now there were only divergencies and difficulties. It puts the ship- owners, the cargo-owners and the underwriters ofall countries on the same footing, and thus clearly represents a very considerable progress. Besides, it cannot be denied that this system is essentially fair. It merges a part of the principles of two entirely divergent systems of legislation and forms thereout a compromise wich leaves intact the methods of limiting the shipowners' liability adopted by each system : a lump sum representing alike the property at sea and the liability. According to trustworthy statistics, the commercial value of steamers is, on the average, less than to £ 8 per ton. If this figure is exceeded sometimes in the case of passenger-steamers, it must be remembered that the great services rendered by such vessels in insuring speedy communication between the various parts of the world, together with the large pecuniary outlay involved and the great risks to which they are exposed, afford a strong argument against any increase at their cost, of that £ 8 rate which is already very high, as established by the English law. On the other hand the owners of ships of a lower value have just ground of complaint against the excessive burden of the English rule, and the option which is left now to them to free themselves by abandoning ship and freight, or by paying an amount equivalent thereto, will doubtless give them satisfaction, whilst it conforms to the practice which has been followcd for centuries by the Continental nations and by the United States. The limitation of liability will apply generally to the acts of the Master, of the crew, of the pilot and of all other persons in the service of the ship ;it will also extend to the contractual or legal liabilities entered intoby the Master, as well as to sums payable for salvage. However, this rule is not without its exception. It has been consi- dered that the present state of the shipowning industry does not now require, as in former times, that limitation of liability should extend (as in continental law) to supplies and repairs ordered by the Master in the course of the voyage. These come within the normal expenses of the voyage, for which the shipowner can and must provide. Modern facilities of communication, the fact that every- where maritime agencies are established, the extension of oversea-credit, the intervention of the underwriters in case of a\'erage, no longer justify the cotinental rule under which the shipowner is allowed to escape his ordinary contractual liabilities on grounds which might seem rather arbitraty. It would be a real iniquityIt would not be just that in case of loss of the ship, the shipowner should be allowed to invoke the limitation of liabilityif, for instance, a bill drawn by the Master in payment for a supply of coals, happens not to have been accepted by the owner at the time when the news of the ship's loss reached him. The same reasons apply as regards repairs of the ship. Finally, from a sense of justice towards thoserho devote their work and risk their lives in the service of maritime enter- prises, it has been decided that the shipowner shall remain personally liable without limitation for the wages of the Master and crew. These exceptions to the rule of limitation have to a large extent facilited an international agreement. The British delegation, whilst agreeing to the continental limitation for the liabilities entered into by the Master generally, has on the other hand obtained satifaction for the claims which they deemed it unfair to subject to any risk ; and it was even possible to meet the views of the United States' delegates who abserved that that country, although having not a large commercial marine, had, as far as supplies and repairs of foreign ships are concerned, a very large interest in insuring the payment of the claims resulting therefrom. Vm- In case of a ship arrested in the course of the voyage, as is usual after a collision, bail is generally given to guarantee the pending claims and the ship continues her voyage. It has been admitted that such bail should not in any way be affected by subsequent events and that as regards these latter, the liability should subsist in its entirety, without being in any measure diminished by the bail previously given. This decision, in view of the large interests involved, also seems to be good policy. This is the only system which may lead to auniform law. To sacrifice this great interest for reasons of pure theory or on account of a system which from a scientifical point of view might seem more perfect and in better harmony - this would only be a policy devoid of wisdom and practical sense. Philosophical perfection of laws does not matter as much as their practical value. Especially on the latter ground, the Venice draft-treaty can give satisfaction to the Governments, as it has very recently been proved in Belgium, where Parliament passed a law which puts into practice the Resolutions adopted at Venice. II. Draft-Treaty on Maritime Marigages and Liens.- The code on Maritime Mortgages and Liens on ships has been inspired by this paramount object namely to insure to maritime credit a really solid basis of actuel value, and to regulate that credit in a practical way corresponding more to the actual requirements of modern navigation than to theorical conceptions derived from civil law and tra- ditions. Every day the capital required by maritimecommerce increases. If we wish to enable marilimecommerce to obtain such money on reasonable terms, it must be ina position to offer real securities, wichai-e only to be found in the merchant fleet itself: It is thereforenecessary that - x - maritime mortgeges, valid in one country,should be respected everywhere else. To effect this, but one condi- tionis required : viz, that the mortgage be properly published. The importance of this point becomes the more evident when itis considered that maritime morgages, vaIidy made according to the laws of one country, have often been declared invalid in another country so that the. lender loses the security on which he relied, especially if one considers what discredit such risks musts necessarily throw on maritime mortgages. But as to the forms for insuring such publicity, the only course has seemed to entrust this matter to the national legislation of each State. 1vVithout intending to trespass on this reserved ground, where administrative questions, often very delicate, are to b met with, the Conference has nevertheless received with approval a motion expressed by the Italian delega- tion :that all countries should adopt an easy and simple system of registration and publication of Mortgages. In order to complete this part of the Committees work, the system existing or to be adopted in each country is now being examined. But even were the most regular publicity for maritime mortgages organized, and even were they strictly respec- ted in all countries when duly and validly made, this would not be sufficient to insure a solid basis to maritime credit; for, even more than the divergencies between the existing legislations, the variety of maritime liens which now exist under the ruling laws and rank prior to mortgages, ren- ders the latter almost worthless.