Shipmaster's Liability for Loss or Damage of Goods Resulting from Their Transporting - Case Study Example

Shipmaster Business The Bulk-Carrier has a lot of violations that were committed if we are to deal with the Haque-Visby rules, with reference regarding the responsibility of the cargo vessel to transport goods from the starting point down to the receiver. If we are to analyze, the cargo vessel has the great responsibility of the safety and quality of the goods to be transported. In the given premise, negligence played a major role on the fate of the carrier during its voyage to transport rice and grains to be brought to from New Orleans to Rotterdam. The given rule stated in Article III section 1 letters a, b, and c, of the Haque-Visby rules under the responsibilities and liabilities. The rules are as follows (Giaschi, C2007); 1. The carrier shall be bound, before and at the beginning of the voyage, to exercise due diligence to (a) Make the ship seaworthy; (b) Properly man, equip and supply the ship; (c) Make the holds, refrigerating and cool chambers, and all other parts of the ship in which goods are carried, fit and safe for their reception, carriage and preservation. Dealing with letter (a), before the voyage began, the ship must be seaworthy meaning all systems including little details before the ship would have its voyage must be looked upon and be resolved in case of malfunctions and similar problems in order to ensure that the cargo ship including the goods that it transports are safe during the time of voyage as well as to comply with the expected time of arrival of the ship. Shipmaster Business 2 In the case of the carrier ship, there are instances that the voyage master has to deviate from the planned route in order to respond from mayday due to malfunctioning of several parts particularly with the steering failure issue as the problem was addressed to the company but during those instances, the company failed to compensate the needs in which the cargo ship perhaps opted to have its voyage due to the fact that there are a lot of goods that are in need to be transported and this leads into voyage of the ship neglecting the standards that are prescribed by the said rule. If we are to further fathom the said premise, we might conclude that the ship opt to have its voyage due to the fact that there are a lot of cargo that are to be transported and time constraint is the main reason why the voyage pursue, in this case, the company has the liability on the issue of that the goods doesn't arrive on time due to re-routing as the voyage master has to declare mayday due to the malfunctioning of the ship. In the case of the contaminated rice due to the presence of rodents on sacks which was later brought to the holds and later contaminated the goods stored in that particular case, the company has its right to invoke its exemptions on the liability on the basis stated in article II of the law. Amissah 1993, re-stated the rule under the said article as "Subject to the provisions of Article VI, 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." Shipmaster Business 3 Looking into the elements on the said article, in the loading stage, the person in charge in the said stage which is the second mate in which several goods has to be scanned before being boarded into the ship in order for the higher authorities in the ship to decide as to whether the goods has to be loaded or not. The second mate, have done his job relaying the sightings of the rodent in the containers containing the goods which would subsequently be a major source of contamination with other goods that are loaded within the same storage room. In relation to the fourth article in which the premises are stated much clearer than the second premise, it is stated in section 1 that (www.jus.uio.no 2007), "Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be liable for loss or damage arising or resulting from unseaworthiness unless caused by want of due diligence on the part of the carrier to make the ship seaworthy, and to secure that the ship is properly manned, equipped and supplied, and to make the holds, refrigerating and cool chambers and all other parts of the ship in which goods are carried fit and safe for their reception, carriage and preservation in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article III. Whenever loss or damage has resulted from unseaworthiness the burden of proving the exercise of due diligence shall be on the carrier or other person claiming exemption under this article." We have to look into the word "unseaworthiness" which would further lead us into the conclusion why the said company has the liability on the problem encircling the operation of the ship business. Shipmaster Business 4 On the other hand in dealing with the liability of the company on the contamination of the rice with the other grains due to the presence of rodents on the said storage rooms of the ship, the fault could be regarded as a responsibility of the men from the chief up to the upper level of command in the voyage. The company should be spared because the crew in the ship has the command responsibility of the ship during the operation of the ship's voyage. In this case, the responsibility of the said contamination should only delve within the people concerned with regards to the said issue. These personnel should be liable due to the fact that the second mate had reported the discrepancy of the goods but the upper level of the voyage paid no attention to it. Also, the section II of the fourth article acquits the Ship and the company in dealing with the aforementioned circumstance as it was stated that "Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be responsible for loss or damage arising or resulting from: (a) Act, neglect, or default of the master, mariner, pilot, or the servants of the carrier in the navigation or in the management of the ship (www.jus.uio.no 2007)." The said premise was a clear case that the said problem rose-up due to neglect of the personnel within the ship when they failed to attend to the second master's report on the presence of the rodents in the sacks of rice. Shipmaster Business 5 To add to that, the Maritime Law Association (MLA) of the United States further supports this claim as they regarded this issue as "Alternative I(a), however, corresponds only to article 4(2)(q) of the Hague and Hague-Visby Rules. The U.S. MLA strongly supports the continued recognition of the "catalogue" of defenses in article 4(2)(b)-(p) of the Hague and Hague-Visby Rules, part of which is included in Article 6.1.2 of the Revised Draft Outline Instrument. (MLA 2001)" Going back to the steering case of the vessel which led to disruption of its voyage, the company may be deprived of its claim in the insurance as direct negligence could also be a factor on the grounds that the insurance brokers could waive the allotted premiums of the insurance on cases brought by similar phenomenon. It was stated that several months prior to the voyage, the crew of the vessel have asked for the materials and equipment needed to rectify the defect of the cargo vessel but the company have not responded to the call. In this case, it can be established that all of the people as well as the company that are involved in the voyage do have knowledge on the situation of the ship. In the case of the aforementioned cargo ship, the transfer of goods was delayed due to the fact that the voyage master has declared Mayday which later resulted into re-routing of the ship. In this case, the goods that are contained in the ship as well as the responsibility of the event could be credited as "Forced Error" due to the fact that the people who are concerned have long knowledge in this particular problem. Shipmaster Business 6 To further establish that the Insurance Company has no liability on the damage of contamination and the delay of arrival of goods, dealing with the ENGLISH MARINE INSURANCE ACT OF 1906, in Article 45 Change of Voyage, section 2 states that "Unless the policy otherwise provides, where there is a change of voyage, the insurer is discharged from liability as from the time of change, that is to say, as from the time when the determination to change it is manifested; and it is immaterial that the ship may not in fact have left the course of voyage contemplated by the policy when the loss occurs (solarnavigator.net 2005)." In this instance, the delay of arrival was due to re-routing out of negligence from the people involved in the ship's operation. In this particular case, the discrepancies of the events happened in a manner that could have been prevented only if the necessary undertakings were served. In this case, it is established that the management of the company failed to provide the necessary things in order to prevent the said hassle. Also, section 1 addresses that "Where, after the commencement of the risk, the destination of the ship is voluntarily changed from the destination contemplated by the policy, there is said to be a change of voyage." In this kind of phenomenon, the premiums and the benefits could be regarded as void as insurers could define the event as "Tolerated error, leading to establishment of hassles to obtain claim from the insurers." Shipmaster Business 7 Upon making the necessary remedy in rectifying the hassle that was brought by this negligence, still, it is best to have the salvage operation through Lloyd's open forum. In this case, contract was made in order for this insurer to deliver the goods as it is very urgent to rectify the said hassle as several customers are expecting to receive the shipments on the prescribed time. It is very important to make the necessary adjustments with not much time requirement. Upon analyzing the said premise, why Lloyd's open forum is is much better than daily hire. In this case, though it was established that there are blunders on the company's part which could be a cause of deprivation of the company not to obtain premiums from the insurer, this kind of feature looks into the possible remedies to help the company to have ways on obtaining benefits. Also, if we are to look into Lloyd's open forum, we can be assured of quality and fast work because the work is a contract basis one. In addition, The Boat Owner's Association of the United States (2007) regarded Lloys as "Often, the only thing the vessels had in common been that they were insured through Lloyd's of London. So Lloyd's developed a "Standard Open Form Salvage Contract" which set to paper the criteria on which the salvage award would be based, and where and how any disputes would be settled. This program was very successful and continues to this day, being utilized by Lloyds underwriters for both commercial vessel and yachts. The Lloyds contract is still the recognized standard for salvage contracts in the international maritime community." Shipmaster Business 8 Upon the arrival in Rotterdam, it is very important to secure the contaminated rice as well as other grains in order for it not to be sold or obtained to the market. Also, it is very important to place the ship under quarantine status in order to prevent outbreak of disease caused by the contamination of the rodents. In this case, the ship would be spared from any legal responsibility should there be any untoward incident caused by the contaminated food. In the mechanical case of the ship, the repair of the needed part of the ship must be done there until the authorities give the ship the green light to have another voyage. It is very important to have the repair on the site to avoid the scenario to happen again. It has been noted that the voyage master have declared Mayday and so, the necessary adjustments must be made. Also, the contaminated goods must be disposed immediately. The company must also initiate amicable settlement among the affected customers due to hassle the voyage has brought to those who have put their good's trust under the said carrier. The company must also study the necessary steps in order to further improve the quality of service that they render. References: 1) Giaschi, C2007, Hague-Visby Rules, Opened February 17, 2007, URL available http://www.admiraltylaw.com/statutes/hague.html 2) Amissah, R 1993, Standard SiSU object citation numbering and system 3) The Hague-Visby Rules opened February 17, 2007, URL available http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/sea.carriage.hague.visby.rules.1968/doc.html#31 4) MLA 2001, Response to CMI Consultation Paper on Transport Law dated 1 June 2001 5) Solarnavigator.net 2005, English Marine Insurance Act 1906. Opened February 17, 2007, URL available, http://www.solarnavigator.net/english_marine_insurance_act_1906.htm#222 6) Boat U.S. (2007), Things Old are new again. Opened January 17,2007, URL available http://www.boatus.com/towing/guide/salvage/thing.asp Read More