The last year has seen a number of significant changes both in maritime and domestic law which may have a considerable impact on the commercial community in the future. In particular, The Hague-Visby Rules have come into operation now that the required number of ratifications and accessions has been reached. Furthermore, they are part of the law of the United Kingdom now that COGSA 1971 is operative. In the field of domestic law the Unfair Terms in Contract Act 1977 will become operative as from Feb. 1, 1978, thus subjecting a wide range of standard conditions of contract to the scrutiny of the courts, inter alia, as to whether certain of their terms will pass the test of “reasonableness” or not. From an administrative viewpoint, the Office of Fair Trading has begun to scrutinise a wide range of standard conditions of contract and associated tariffs used by the members of the various trade associations with results yet to be seen.

The general intention of these innovations is, laudibly enough, to further protect the consumer, who is increasingly protected by law in many Western countries, particularly in respect of domestic products and services. Gradually the manufacturer of goods and the provider of services for domestic consumption is being required to meet his social responsibilities, thus opening up the fast developing field of product liability law and practice, and for the insurer new fields of underwriting. Where, however, consumer protection begins to impinge upon the general relations of the international trading community it is less clear to what extent it can offer tangible benefits.

The underlying problem seems to be that the greater the responsibility placed upon the provider of commercial services, the more the latter will need recourse to insurance or other forms of protection to cover himself against a commensurate increase in liability. To reimburse himself against the extra expense incurred he will ultimately pass on this charge to the consumer in the form of higher prices. It therefore remains to be seen to what extent consumerism in international trade will succeed in achieving its aims.

An aspect of international trade which sometimes seems rather neglected is the essential fact that what most assists the growth of commercial relationships is a reasonable degree of certainty as to the actual terms of trade. Given the existence of this the parties can then take such steps as they deem necessary to protect themselves in the most economical way possible. It has yet to be seen whether The Hague-Visby Rules or the Unfair Terms in Contract Act further promote commercial certainty or not. To the extent to which they fail in this they will do a disservice to international and domestic trade. It is to be hoped that the Office of Fair Trading, through its administrative machinery, can foster uniformity in domestic conditions of contract as regards carriage, forwarding, warehousing and associated operations so as to further the growth of uniform liability for all stages of through transport shipments. Conversely, it is to be hoped that any uncertainty raised by the introduction of the test of “reasonableness” into standard trading conditions by the Unfair Terms in Contract Act will not result in the fragmentation of such contractual uniformity as has been achieved to date by the work of the various trade associations. Much will depend upon how the courts approach the matter.

The “Quarterly” will enter into its fifth year of publication with the next issue. For the future we hope to extend its coverage of the various branches of commercial law and practice as far as space permits, to enable the commercial and legal communities to keep up to date with developments both at home and abroad. Starting with this issue a new section devoted to Recent Legislation has been introduced to provide a brief analysis of new statutory provisions which appear to have a direct effect on the commercial community. Further specialist sections will be introduced as and when the need arises.

Short articles on legal and commercial developments throughout the world will be welcomed by the Editorial Board. They should be submitted two to three months prior to quarterly publication date.

* * * *

Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly is entering the fifth year of its existence. Started as an experimental service for the wide range of specialists in the City of London and the commercial centres of the world requiring up-to-date information and comment on the complex legal problems surrounding the law of trade and transportation, it proved an instant success and has now a wide circulation in virtually all countries of the world.

With the ever expanding range of services offered by the Legal Department of Lloyd’s of London Press Ltd. requiring constant attention, Mr. Geoffrey Hall, the Manager of the Department, who was responsible for the birth of the Journal, is regretfully relinquishing editorial control. The post of General Editor is therefore being taken over by Dr. D.J. Hill, of Queen’s University, Belfast, who is widely known in transport law circles and who has been a regular contributor to the Journal since its inception. It is hoped in the future to expand the coverage of the Journal in those fields of particular interest to the commercial and legal communities both in the United Kingdom and abroad to enable subscribers to keep as up to date as possible. A new feature will be regular editorial comment on new developments in commercial and maritime law. Any suggestions from subscribers as to ways in which the Journal can be improved or topics which warrant further coverage are welcomed.

Section 61 reads:

Section 62(1) reads:

A claim for constructive total loss of ship or goods is dependent upon notice of abandonment having been properly given to the underwriters. The notice has to be given by the assured with reasonable diligence after the receipt of reliable information of the loss (s. 62(3)). In the London market, it is customary for underwriters immediately upon receipt of the notice to decline to accept the abandonment, but to agree to place the assured in the same position as if a writ had been issued on that day. This is done in order to overcome the provision, peculiar to English law, that the facts on which the notice of abandonment may have to be tested are those applying at the date when legal proceedings are brought and not those applying at the date of the notice.

At this point, therefore, the assured is in practice put to prove the correctness of the facts on which he relies for the validity of the notice of abandonment. If he succeeds in so doing, the underwriters will then accept the abandonment, either expressly or impliedly (see s. 62(5)). Payment of the constructive total loss claimed would, of course, imply acceptance under this sub-section.

Most claims for constructive total loss of ship are based upon s. 60(2) of the Act, which reads:

In the construction of this sub-clause, one of the most fascinating questions still to be decided is—in relation to what are salvage operations and general average con