Every junior clerk in Lloyd’s Recoveries Department knows that the state of the law is such that, to coin a phrase, it is harder for a shipowner to collect from the concerned in cargo in general average than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Make no mistake, the collection of general average contributions from cargo interests (or rather the failure to do so) is a serious matter to shipowners and their Protection and Indemnity Clubs. To start at the beginning, the liability of cargo to contribute in general average is something which is entirely separate from the general average adjustment per se. Indeed, it has nothing to do with the general average adjustment. It is quite possible (and not unusual) for a vessel to be unsea-worthy by any standards and yet still be involved in a valid general average situation. In short, if a vessel is in a position of peril (whatever the reason) and a general average sacrifice or expenditure is made or incurred for the common safety of both ship and cargo, a valid general average situation exists.1

It is only when the shipowner submits his request to the concerned in cargo for the contribution shown in the general average adjustment to be due, that the question of enforcing contribution against cargo arises. Nor is it part of an average adjuster’s duties to decide whether or not claims for contribution in general average can be enforced against any of the parties involved. The general average adjustment merely provides evidence as to the details, computations and allocation of the general average.2 Nevertheless, after the issue of the general average adjustment, the average adjuster is often involved in the mechanics of effecting collections from the concerned in cargo and consequently, whether he likes it or not, is frequently involved in correspondence and discussions with cargo interests as to whether the general average contributions shown in the adjustment to be payable by cargo can be enforced against the general average security which had been provided.

It is a thankless and frustrating task. Sometimes the average adjuster is able to assist in satisfying cargo interests as to their liability but in many cases he is obliged to leave the arena to the main contestants, the shipowner and the cargo owner often ably, if expensively, seconded by their legal advisers. Perhaps if the principals themselves had a better working knowledge of the rights and obligations of a carrier many of these disagreements would not develop to a point where litigation takes over. My modest objective is therefore to review the basic problems arising out of the enforce-