INSTRUMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL HARMONISATION IN ENGLAND AND WALES: How ‘International’ is International Commercial Law? Submitted in respect of the Degree Doctor of Philosophy University of East Anglia Law School 99,747 words Mary J. Wallace © This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that no quotation from the thesis, nor any information derived therefrom, may be published without the author’s prior, written consent. ABSTRACT The object of this thesis was to establish whether a culture has developed in England and Wales towards international instruments of commercial harmonisation. In doing so, the thesis has examined the approach of five main institutions and groups, who represent the structures and mechanisms responsible for the functioning and on-going development of international commercial law, namely Universities; Practitioners; Cargo Owners, Freight Forwarder and Carriers; the Judiciary and Government / Parliament. The interaction of these institutions and groups with international commercial conventions, protocols and practices was analysed and the research has shown that although these institutions and groups generally display an outward sense of internationality, there is an underlying sense that international commercial laws are used as a means of better fitting English law to the transaction at hand, rather than as a means of applying another body of rules in preference to the governing national law. The research provides evidence that the approach of the institutions and groups to international commercial instruments is informed by complex and frequently inter-related factors, and that this generally results in a continued reliance on English law as the primary law for cross-border commercial transactions. Whilst there is support for the process of harmonising international commercial law, it is clear that the systems and processes for putting such laws into practice are at best incomplete. The research provides significant new data as to the current attitudes and approaches to international commercial instruments that are held by some of the main commercial sectors in England and Wales. The thesis further documents how these attitudes and approaches have been informed and this may help support a platform from which the use and implementation of harmonised commercial laws in England and Wales may be better enabled in the future. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For my beloved Father. Special thanks to Professors Alastair Mullis and Duncan Sheehan for their academic support and encouragement; and Sincere appreciation to Professor J.D. Pickard and Mr R.J.C. Laing at Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge for making it possible. CONTENTS List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………. vii List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………….. viii Table of Cases………………………………………………………………………………………. ix Statutes & Statutory Instruments ………………………………………………………… xv Table of Conventions, Model Laws and Protocols…………………………………. xvii Table of Customs & Practice, Principles and Rules………………………………… xix Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………………………….. xx Chapter 1 - Introduction & Background 1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1 1.1 Background………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2 2.0 OVERALL METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 2.1 Who is it about? ………………………………………………………………………………………………..4 2.2 Why these Institutions and Organisational Groups were selected? ..................... 4 2.2.1 Universities……………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 2.2.2 Practitioners………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 2.2.3 Cargo Owners, Freight Forwarders & Carriers……………………………………….. 5 2.2.4 The Judiciary…………………………………………………………………………………………..6 2.2.5 Government & Parliament…………………………………………………………………….. 6 2.3 How the Study has been conducted………………………………………………………………….. 6 2.4 Definitions………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 3.0 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY…………………………………………………………………………………………. 9 4.0 RELATED WORK & CONTEXT OF RESEARCH…………………………………………………………………… 10 4.1 Universities……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11 4.2 Practitioners……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12 4.3 Cargo Owners, Freight Forwarders & Carriers…………………………………………………… 13 4.4 The Judiciary……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14 4.5 Government & Parliament………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Chapter 2 - The Universities 1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 2.0 METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 18 2.1 Who and Why? ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 18 2.2 How the Study was conducted? ............................................................................ 19 2.3 Which Universities were selected? ………………………………………………………………….. 19 2.4 Limitations of the study…………………………………………………………………………………….. 21 3.0 UNIVERSITIES AND UNDERGRADUATE COMMERCIAL LAW…………………………………………… 22 3.1 The Golden Triangle………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22 3.2 The Russell Group……………………………………………………………………………………………… 24 3.3 The 1994 Group………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26 i CONTENTS 3.4 The Million+ Group…………………………………………………………………………………………… 28 3.5 The University Alliance……………………………………………………………………………………… 30 3.6 The Unaffiliated Universities……………………………………………………………………………… 34 4.0 SUMMARY COMPARISON OF GROUPS………………………………………………………………………….. 36 4.1 Comparison of ‘In depth’ Study…………………………………………………………………………. 37 4.2 Comparison of Universities having NO International Commercial Content……….. 38 5.0 POSTGRADUATE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL LAW…………………………………………………. 39 5.1 Postgraduate Commercial Law Courses…………………………………………………………….. 40 5.2 Why Post Graduate level? ……………………………………………………………………………….. 41 6.0 WHAT HAS INFORMED UNDERGRADUATE COMMERCIAL LAW…………………………………….. 43 6.1 The influence of the Profession on Legal Education…………………………………………… 43 6.1.1 The Effect of the Foundation Subjects…………………………………………………… 43 6.1.2 The Effect of Conversion Courses………………………………………………………….. 46 6.1.3 The Gate-Keeping influence of the Profession……………………………………….. 48 6.1.4 The influence of the Legal firms…………………………………………………………….. 48 6.2 The influence of English Law…………………………………………………………………………….. 50 6.3 The influence of the universities themselves…………………………………………………….. 53 6.3.1 Universities’ International perspective………………………………………………….. 55 6.3.2 Commercial law as an optional subject………………………………………………….. 57 7.0 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 60 Chapter 3 - The Practitioners 1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..63 2.0 METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 64 2.1 Which Practitioners were selected? ………………………………………………………………… 64 2.2 How the Study was conducted…………………………………………………………………….……. 64 2.2.1 How ‘International Practices’ were identified………………………………………… 65 2.2.2 The Questionnaire…………………………………………………………………………………. 66 2.3 Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………………………………………. 66 3.0 INTERNATIONAL RULES AND PRACTICES………………………………………………………………………. 68 3.1 Incoterms…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 68 3.2 The UCP and Other International Bank Payment Undertakings…………………………. 70 3.3 International Commercial Arbitration Rules………………………………………………………. 71 3.4 The York Antwerp Rules of General Average…………………………………………………….. 72 4.0 INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL CONVENTIONS – RATIFIED BY THE UK…………………………. 73 4.1 The International Carriage Conventions……………………………………………………………. 74 4.2 International Secured Transactions…………………………………………………………………… 75 4.3 International Arbitration…………………………………………………………………………………… 75 4.4 International Civil Procedures…………………………………………………………………………… 76 4.5 Cross Border Insolvency……………………………………………………………………………………. 77 5.0 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS – NOT RATIFIED BY THE UK………………………………………… 77 5.1 The CISG 1980…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 78 5.2 The Cape Town Convention 2001……………………………………………………………………… 79 ii CONTENTS 5.3 Carriage of Goods by Sea Conventions……………………………………………………………… 81 5.3.1 The Hamburg Rules 1978………………………………………………………………………. 81 5.3.2 The Rotterdam Rules 2008……………………………………………………………………. 82 5.4 Securities Conventions……………………………………………………………………………………… 84 5.4.1 The Hague Securities Conventions 2002……………………………………………….. 84 5.4.2 The Geneva Securities Convention 2009……………………………………………….. 84 6.0 WHAT HAS INFORMED THE PRACTITIONERS’ APPROACH? ………………………………………….. 85 6.1 Ignorance………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 86 6.2 Reluctance to Change from English Law……………………………………………………………. 87 6.3 Fear…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 88 7.0 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 90 Chapter 4 - The Cargo Owners, Freight Forwarders & Carriers 1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 94 2.0 METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 95 2.1 Who was selected? …………………………………………………………………………………………. 95 2.1.1 Cargo Owners……………………………………………………………………………………….. 95 2.1.2 Freight Forwarders……………………………………………………………………………….. 96 2.1.3 Carriers…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 96 2.2 How the Study was conducted………………………………………………………………………….. 97 2.2.1 The Questionnaire…………………………………………………………………………………. 98 2.2.2 Interviews……………………………………………………………………………………………… 98 2.3 Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………………………………………. 99 3.0 CARGO OWNERS’ APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS……………………………….. 100 3.1 Use of Rules and Practices………………………………………………………………………………… 100 3.1.1 Incoterms………………………………………………………………………………………………. 100 3.1.2 The UCP…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 101 3.1.3