A b) Fire, unless caused by the actual fault or privity of the carrier.
Perils, dangers and accidents of the sea or other navigable waters.
A d) Act of God.
A e) Act of war.
A f) Act of public enemies.
A g) Arrest or restraint of princes, rulers or people, or seizure under legal process.
A h) Quarantine restrictions.
A i) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods, his agent or representative.
A j) Strikes or lockouts or stoppage or restraint of labor from whatever cause, whether partial or general.
A k) Riots and civil commotions.
A l) Saving or attempting to save life or property at sea.
A m) Wastage in bulk of weight or any other loss or damage arising from inherent defect, quality or vice of the goods.
A n) Insufficiency of packing.
A o) Insufficiency or inadequacy of marks.
A p) Latent defects not discoverable by due diligence.
A q) Any other cause arising without the actual fault or privity of the carrier, or without the fault or neglect of the agents or servants of the carrier, but the burden of proof shall be on the person claiming the benefit of this exception to show that neither the actual fault or privity of the carrier nor the fault or neglect of the agents or servants of the carrier contributed to the loss or damage. (Lexmark, 2008)
Also addressed in the Hague-Visby rules is the container weight of goods in regards to liability which states: "Unless the nature and value of such goods have been declared by the shipper before shipment and inserted in the bill of lading, neither the carrier nor the ship shall in any event be or become liable for any loss or damage to or in connection with the goods in an amount exceeding the equivalent of 666.67 units of account per package or unit or units of account per kilo of gross weight of the goods lost or damaged, whichever is the higher. The total amount recoverable shall be calculated by reference to the value of such goods at the place and time at which the goods are discharged from the ship in accordance with the contract or should have been so discharged." (Lexmark, 2008) the value of goods is also stated to be fixed in accordance with the "...commodity exchange price, or, if there be no such price, according to the current market price, or, if there be no commodity exchange price or current market price, by reference to the normal value of goods of the same kind and quality."
SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
Clearly there are differences between the Hague Rules and Hague-Visby Rules in that the Hague-Visby Rules eliminate many of the areas of rule application which are stated in the Hague Rules...
Mellen Press. Online available at http://www.mellenpress.com/mellenpress.cfm?bookid=6235&pc=9
Reynolds, Frances (1990) the Hague Rules, the Hague-Visby Rules, and the Hamburg Rules. 7 MLAANZ Journal. Online available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ANZMLJ/1990/2.pdf
Tetley, William QC (2004) Interpretation and Construction of the Hague, Hague-Visby and Hamburg Rules. 2994 10 Jiml 30-70. Online available at http://www.mcgill.ca/files/maritimelaw/rulesinterpretation.pdf
The Hague-Visby Rules - the Hague Rules as Amended by the Brussels Protocol 1968 multilateral Lex Mercatoria www.lexmercatoria.org. Accessed online at http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/sea.carriage.hague.visby.rules.1968/doc.html
Tetley, William QC (2004) Interpretation and Construction of the Hague, Hague-Visby and Hamburg Rules. 2994 10 Jiml 30-70. Online available at http://www.mcgill.ca/files/maritimelaw/rulesinterpretation.pdf
Viscount Simonds in Riverstone Meat Co. Pty.v. Lancashire Shipping Co. (the Muncaster Castle):183 ([1961] a.C. 807 at p. 836, [1961] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 57 at p. 67, 1961 AMC 1357 at p. 1362 (H.L.).
See, for e.g., Encyclopaedia Britannica v. Hong Kong Producer 422 F.2d 7 at p. 11, 1969 AMC 1741 at p. 1746, [1969] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 536 at p. 539 (2 Cir. 1969); Mormaclynx (Leather's Best Inc. v. S.S. in: Tetley (2004). Mormaclynx) 313 F. Supp. 1373 at p. 1381, 1970 AMC 1310 at p. 1323, [1970] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 527 at
534 (E.D.N.Y. 1970), aff'd in pertinent part, rev'd in part, 451 F.2d 800, 1971 AMC 2383 (2 Cir. 1971).; Varian Assocs. v C.G.T., 85 Cal. App. 3d 369 at p. 375, 149 Cal. Rptr. 534 at pp. 538-539, 1980 AMC
450 at p. 456 (Cal. C.A. 1979) in: Tetley (2004)
Hakan, Karan (2005) the Carrier's Liability Under international Maritime Convention - the Hague, Hague-visby and Hamburg Rules. Mellen Press. Online available at http://www.mellenpress.com/mellenpress.cfm?bookid=6235&pc=9
Reynolds, Frances (1990) the Hague Rules, the Hague-Visby Rules, and the Hamburg Rules. 7 MLAANZ Journal. Online available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ANZMLJ/1990/2.pdf
The Hague-Visby Rules - the Hague Rules as Amended by the Brussels Protocol 1968 multilateral Lex Mercatoria www.lexmercatoria.org. Accessed online at http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/sea.carriage.hague.visby.rules.1968/doc.html
