Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
MISDELIVERY AND TIME BARS
The Captain Gregos
In The Captain Gregos,1 owners of crude oil alleged that part of the oil had been stolen by the carrier at the time of delivery. The carriers issued an originating summons to determine whether the cargo owners’ claim was time barred under Art. III, r. 6 of the Hague-Visby Rules. Hirst, J., held2 that it was not barred, mainly because the alleged misdelivery occurred after the sequence of transport operations, as listed in Art. II, to which the Rules applied. His decision on this point has now been reversed by the Court of Appeal.
The scope of the rules
Article II of the Hague-Visby Rules provides: “Subject to the provisions of Article VI,3 under every contract of carriage of goods by sea the carrier, in relation to the loading, handling, stowage, carriage, custody, care, and discharge of such goods, shall be subject to the responsibilities and liabilities, and entitled to the rights and immunities hereinafter set forth.”
Bingham, L.J., with whose judgment Slade, L.J., and Stocker, L.J., gave short concurring judgments, found it “strange” that the researches of counsel had unearthed no foreign decisions on the point.4 Indeed, he might, for example, have
1. Cia Portorafti Commerciale S.A. v. Ultramar Panama Inc. [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 310.
2. [1989] 2 All E.R. 54; noted [1989] LMCLQ 394.
3. Article VI, which concerns carriage in respect of which no bill of lading is issued, was not relevant to the decision.
4. At p. 315.
314