Rules of Affreightment” which parties to the contract could voluntarily incorporate
into their bills of lading.
68 However, these rules were considered to be an
unworkable compromise between the cargo and ship interests by almost all related
private entrepreneurs.
69 Thus, they were rescinded at the London Conference of
1887.
70 It is clear from this brief historical narrative that uniformity can be achieved
only if it is based on a workable compromise.
Thirdly, the establishment of the Comité Maritime International (CMI)
71 had an
indirect but significant importance for the uniformity of carriage of goods by sea
regimes. In 1897, several national Associations of Maritime Law joined together to
establish the CMI.
72 This was the first international organisation concerned exclusively with maritime law and related commercial practices.
73 First, the CMI changed
the approach to uniformity from modelling private agreements to diplomatic negotiation. It persuaded the Belgian government to initiate the first Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Law, held in Brussels in 1905.
74 It is apparent that the participants
in this and later conferences were no longer private entrepreneurs but national
diplomatic representatives. In addition, both the CMI and the Diplomatic Conference
on Maritime Law promoted the later passage of the Hague Rules.
75 It is noteworthy
that the Hague and Visby Rules were drafted and negotiated by private entities or
representatives of their national Associations on substantial and substantive matters.
They were subsequently finalised at diplomatic conferences and signed by government delegates.
In May 1921, the ILA’s Maritime Law Committee met at the London Conference
to formulate uniform model rules based on the Canadian Act governing sea bills of
lading.
76 The committee was appointed to prepare the draft rules and their members
consisted of representatives of governments, as well as the private sector
representing commercial interests
77 which included carriers, shippers, bankers,
underwriters and their respective associations.
78 The Committee met to draft compromise rules which were discussed at a meeting of the International Chamber of
68 Sturley (1991), p. 8. ILA, Report of the 12th Conference (‘Hamburg Conference 1885’), 165–168
reprinted in Sturley (1990) (Volume 2), 122–125. CMI (1979), p. 16.
69 Ibid, 8 (stating that only a few German companies adopted the rules).
70 Ibid.
71 CMI (2013).
72 Ibid. The Comité Maritime International (CMI) had its first conference in June 1897.
73 Ibid.
74 Sturley (1991), p. 9. Lilar and van den Bosch (1973), pp. 16, 72.
75 Ibid, pp. 9–10.
76 Ibid, 20. See, e.g. ‘Hague Conf. Rep.’, 38 (Sir Norman Hill), reprinted in Sturley (1990) (Volume
1), p. 144. Cf. Report of the Maritime Law Commission on Bills of Lading, xxxix, reprinted in
Sturley (100) (Volume 1), p. 94.
77 Sturley (1991), pp. 20, 26. See Hague Conference Report, cxiii–cxix, reprinted in ibid (Vol. 1),
168–174 listing the delegates and their occupations.
78 Ibid.
Lex Maritima in a Changing World: Development and Prospect of. . .
769
into their bills of lading.
68 However, these rules were considered to be an
unworkable compromise between the cargo and ship interests by almost all related
private entrepreneurs.
69 Thus, they were rescinded at the London Conference of
1887.
70 It is clear from this brief historical narrative that uniformity can be achieved
only if it is based on a workable compromise.
Thirdly, the establishment of the Comité Maritime International (CMI)
71 had an
indirect but significant importance for the uniformity of carriage of goods by sea
regimes. In 1897, several national Associations of Maritime Law joined together to
establish the CMI.
72 This was the first international organisation concerned exclusively with maritime law and related commercial practices.
73 First, the CMI changed
the approach to uniformity from modelling private agreements to diplomatic negotiation. It persuaded the Belgian government to initiate the first Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Law, held in Brussels in 1905.
74 It is apparent that the participants
in this and later conferences were no longer private entrepreneurs but national
diplomatic representatives. In addition, both the CMI and the Diplomatic Conference
on Maritime Law promoted the later passage of the Hague Rules.
75 It is noteworthy
that the Hague and Visby Rules were drafted and negotiated by private entities or
representatives of their national Associations on substantial and substantive matters.
They were subsequently finalised at diplomatic conferences and signed by government delegates.
In May 1921, the ILA’s Maritime Law Committee met at the London Conference
to formulate uniform model rules based on the Canadian Act governing sea bills of
lading.
76 The committee was appointed to prepare the draft rules and their members
consisted of representatives of governments, as well as the private sector
representing commercial interests
77 which included carriers, shippers, bankers,
underwriters and their respective associations.
78 The Committee met to draft compromise rules which were discussed at a meeting of the International Chamber of
68 Sturley (1991), p. 8. ILA, Report of the 12th Conference (‘Hamburg Conference 1885’), 165–168
reprinted in Sturley (1990) (Volume 2), 122–125. CMI (1979), p. 16.
69 Ibid, 8 (stating that only a few German companies adopted the rules).
70 Ibid.
71 CMI (2013).
72 Ibid. The Comité Maritime International (CMI) had its first conference in June 1897.
73 Ibid.
74 Sturley (1991), p. 9. Lilar and van den Bosch (1973), pp. 16, 72.
75 Ibid, pp. 9–10.
76 Ibid, 20. See, e.g. ‘Hague Conf. Rep.’, 38 (Sir Norman Hill), reprinted in Sturley (1990) (Volume
1), p. 144. Cf. Report of the Maritime Law Commission on Bills of Lading, xxxix, reprinted in
Sturley (100) (Volume 1), p. 94.
77 Sturley (1991), pp. 20, 26. See Hague Conference Report, cxiii–cxix, reprinted in ibid (Vol. 1),
168–174 listing the delegates and their occupations.
78 Ibid.
Lex Maritima in a Changing World: Development and Prospect of. . .
769