the travaux préparatoires hague rules hague-visby rules - Comite ...

274 COMITE MARITIME INTERNATIONALThe Travaux Préparatoires of the Hague and Hague-Visby Rulesmuch with regard to my fellow members and still more to the Conference. As I understandit our recommendation is that we leave to the Diplomatic Conference to settle,we accepting their decision, first, the time from which the notice of loss or damageis to run - that depends upon what is to be treated as delivery, as the handing over fromthe ship.[460]Mr. W. W. Paine: Before Sir Norman leaves the rostrum may I ask one very minorpoint. It is perhaps of importance.The Chairman: Mr. Paine, I am going to call upon each of the gentlemen who roseand who I thought would better reserve their inquiries until Sir Norman had concludedhis statement. I will take your question now or theirs, just as it is convenient.Mr. W. W. Paine: I think it might be convenient whilst Sir Norman is in the rostrum.“The time from which the notice is to run” under Article 3(6) seems to me to bea funny expression, if you look at the terms of Article 3(6). I want to see whether whatis meant is not the time at which that notice is to be given, because there is no periodof notice.[461]Sir Norman Hill: Yes, that is a better expression.Mr. W. W. Paine: The time at which notice is to be given.[463]Dr. Eric Jackson: The other point which I made as a point of order when Sir NormanHill was addressing the Conference - I make it again - was that I understood thatthe words “into the custody of the person entitled to delivery thereof”, under clause 6Article III, had been accepted.The Chairman: Wait a moment, I want just to make sure that I appreciate it on thedocument: “before or [464] at the time of the removal of the goods into the custodyof the person entitled to delivery thereof”. You say that is where the agreed words asyou understand them end.Dr. Eric Jackson: I understood that up to that point there was no divergence ofopinion. There was some divergence of opinion as to whether the following words“under the contract of carriage” should come out or not, and we simply said that couldbe left to the Diplomatic Conference to settle; but I want to make it perfectly clear that,so far as I understood the Committee, the rest “into the custody of the person entitledto delivery thereof” stood.Mr. Louis Franck: Yes.The Chairman: I will ask Sir Norman whether it is his view that the agreed wordsare the words “at the time of the removal of the goods into the custody of the personentitled to delivery thereof”.Sir Norman Hill: Sir, you must not put it too high. The Sub-Committee were notprepared this morning to pass that Rule in any particular form of language, I think thatthey were satisfied with those words, but those words hinge on the next words, and Ido not think it was the wish of the Sub-Committee - certainly I did not understand it- merely to refer three words to the Diplomatic Conference. I do not think the Sub-Committee would have thought that they could fairly make such a recommendation tothe Diplomatic Conference. As I understand, you will have on the Diplomatic Conferencea very able representative of the Sub-Committee in the person of [465] JudgeHough who heard everything that was said. I think that the members of the Sub-Committeewere satisfied with those words, but if the Diplomatic Conference want to ad-