It is a pleasure to welcome a new volume on carriage of goods by sea which breaks new ground by attempting to achieve a critical reappraisal of the relevant law within the scope of 450 pages and which is written in a style eminently suitable for student use. Professor Tan Lee Meng approaches carriage from the standpoint of the law of Singapore, which, although based on English precedents, has nevertheless developed a rich vein of case law of its own. The book covers the normal range of topics included in a treatise on carriage of goods by sea, to which have been added a chapter on salvage and wreck and a concluding resume of the main provisions of the Hamburg Rules. A brief appendix incorporates the Bills of Lading Act 1855, the text of the York-Antwerp Rules 1974 and the Hamburg Rules, together with extracts from two Singapore statutes, the Civil Law Act and the Merchant Shipping Act.

A perusal of the text confirms that, at least from the common law point of view, the law on carriage by sea in Singapore differs little from the corresponding law in the United Kingdom, which is perhaps not surprising in a jurisdiction from which an appeal lies to the Privy Council. Professor Tan has, however, resisted the temptation to write a textbook based essentially on English jurisprudence with occasional Singaporean references but has written throughout from the Singaporean standpoint, basing his statements of principle, wherever possible, on local decisions. In this he has perhaps been too successful in that he has possibly narrowed the market for an attractive book.

The one major difference between the two systems is surprisingly to be found in the respective approaches to implementing the provisions of the Hague-Visby Rules. Whether by intention or inadvertence, the draftsmen of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1972 in Singapore retained the language of the enabling sections of the former Hague Rules statute, thus providing the opportunity for possible confusion. Section 3 of the Act provides that the Hague-Visby Rules shall apply to outward bills from Singapore, ignoring the fact that Art. X of the appended Rules envisages a far wider application. Potential difficulties in interpretation are obvious, but much of the impact of the Hague-Visby Rules will be lost unless Art. X is given overriding effect. Again s. 3 does not follow the British lead in giving the new Rules the “force of law” but prefers the more ambiguous provision that they shall “have effect” in Singapore and couples this with the retention of the now outdated paramount clause approach. Earlier case law has indicated that the latter approach might render the application of the Rules vulnerable to a suitably drafted choice of law clause. In this respect it is interesting to note that already a Singapore judge in The Epar [1985] 2 M.L.J. 3 has sought to retrieve the situation by interpreting the clause as imposing a mandatory obligation along the lines indicated by the House of Lords in The Hollandia [1983] A.C. 565.

Professor Tan presents his material and arguments in a lucid and attractive style and the various aspects of the carriage operation are for once covered in a logical and intelligible sequence. Only on one point of presentation can the author, in the reviewer’s opinion, be