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

PART II - HAGUE RULES 467Article 4 (5) - Limits of liabilityMr. W. W. Paine: May I suggest that it should be expressed in this way: “£100, or,at the par value of exchange in any other currency”? That is what is intended.Sir James Hope Simpson: May I offer an observation on that? Let us take this case.Suppose you are exporting timber from Poland, if a claim arises and £100 is tendered,the Pole will get what will be worth I suppose to-day about 5s.; whereas if you take thecurrent rate of exchange, he will get something like 700,000 Polish marks. That is avery serious thing. It seems to me that all calculations of business are not based upontheoretical standards like the par values; they are based on current rates of exchange;and it seems to me that the proper method is to say this, that it [201] shall be limitedto £100, or, in the case of conversion into a foreign currency the equivalent of £100 atthe current rate of exchange.Mr. Dor: If you like.Sir James Hope Simpson: That means the Frenchman to-day will get 4,700 francsagainst 2,500 pre-war.Mr. Dor: That is quite all right; especially as we hope the exchange will soon rightitself.The Chairman: Then it reads: “Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be responsiblein any event for loss or damage to or in connection with goods beyond £100, or theequivalent in other currencies at the current rate of exchange”.Sir James Hope Simpson: That is right, Sir.Mr. De Rousiers: Quite right; that is exactly the reverse of the proposal which wasmade. That means in France you must pay just now about 5,000 francs instead of2,500. You take the freight in francs, and you have to pay the indemnity in pounds.That is exactly the reverse.The Chairman: I am afraid we must not go back; whether we are right or wrong,we must stand by what we have done. “£100, or the equivalent in other countries atthe current rate of exchange, per package, unless the nature and value of such goodshave been declared by the shipper before the goods are shipped and have been insertedin the bill of lading”. (Hear, hear). Now I proceed: “The declaration of the shipperas to the nature and value of any goods declared shall be prima facie evidence, butshall not be binding or conclusive on the carrier”. Then: “By agreement between thecarrier, master or agent of the carrier and the shipper another maximum amount thanmentioned in this paragraph may be fixed, provided that such maximum shall not beless than the figures above named”. Is that agreed? (Agreed).Text adopted by the Conference4. Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be responsible in any event for loss or damageto or in connection with goods IN AN AMOUNT BEYOND £100 PER PACKAGE OR UNIT,OR THE EQUIVALENT OF THAT SUM IN OTHER CURRENCY, unless the nature and value ofsuch goods have been declared by the shipper BEFORE THE GOODS ARE SHIPPED and HAVEBEEN inserted in the bill of lading.BY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CARRIER, MASTER OR AGENT OF THE CARRIER ANDTHE SHIPPER ANOTHER MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAN MENTIONED IN THIS PARAGRAPH MAY BEFIXED, PROVIDED THAT SUCH MAXIMUM SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN THE FIGURE ABOVENAMED.The declaration by the shipper as to the nature and value of any goods declaredshall be prima facie evidence, but shall not be binding or conclusive on the carrier.