Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
US Maritime Law
Robert Force * and Martin Davies **
CASES
301. Ambraco Inc v. Bossclip BV1
Carriage of goods by sea—whether stevedore bound by forum selection clause in ocean carrier’s bill of lading
The plaintiff’s cargo of thousands of bales of bailer twine was carried from Brazil to New Orleans on Clipper Faith pursuant to seventeen bills of lading issued by the vessel defendants. The twine was damaged either while in the custody of the vessel defendants or while in the custody of the discharging stevedore in New Orleans, Pacorini Holding LLC. The plaintiff sued the vessel defendants and Pacorini in personam and Clipper Faith in rem in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The District Court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims against the vessel defendants because of an exclusive jurisdiction clause in the bills of lading providing that all claims must be brought in the High Court of Justice in London. After the claims against the vessel defendants had been dismissed, Pacorini cross-claimed against the vessel defendants, seeking contribution or an indemnity. The District Court dismissed Pacorini’s cross-claim against the vessel defendants. The plaintiff and Pacorini appealed.
Decision: Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded. The plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed. Pacorini’s appeal was allowed and the proceeding was remanded to the District Court.
Held: (1) In Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros SA v. M/V Sky Reefer,2 the US Supreme Court held that foreign forum selection clauses are not invalidated by the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), s 3(8)3 unless the chosen foreign forum would provide less protection to the cargo plaintiff than COGSA would. The party resisting enforcement of a forum selection clause on these grounds bears a heavy burden of proof.
(2) The plaintiff argued that the English court would apply English law, notwithstanding the presence of a Clause Paramount in the bills of lading incorporating COGSA for carriage to or from the United States. It must be assumed that English courts would honour the Clause Paramount and give effect to the parties’ intention to apply COGSA to their dispute. There was no evidence to suggest that English courts applying COGSA would
* Niels F Johnsen Professor of Maritime Law and Director Emeritus, Maritime Law Center, Tulane Law School, New Orleans.
** Admiralty Law Institute Professor of Maritime Law and Director, Maritime Law Center, Tulane Law School, New Orleans.
1. (2009) 570 F 3d 233; 2009 AMC 1696 (5th Cir).
2. (1995) 515 US 528; 1995 AMC 1817.
3. Equivalent to the Hague Rules, Art III, r 8.
US MARITIME LAW
215