comprehensive one was achieved when the container emerged. According to the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) statistics, sea
container transport kept increasing in all OECD countries except in Australia,
Canada and Belgium, where it fell sharply from the 1970s to about 1996, but started
to increase again after that period.
88
Through the use of containers, loading and discharging of cargoes was simplified.
The freight costs of loading and unloading a container were far less than those for
individual packages.
89 The container revolution eliminated the cost of unloading
freight from rail cars or trucks on trans-shipment to a ship.
90 It was estimated that
containerisation led to a decrease in transport costs of between 5 and 10% of the
goods’ values,
91 and it was also pointed out that the time for loading and unloading
was shortened from 3 days to approximately 8 h.
92 In short, freight rates and loading
times were both sharply reduced.
As a consequence, courts around the world spent decades trying to ascertain the
new meaning of “package” in containerized transport,
93 the principal issue being
whether a sealed container constitutes a single package under the original Hague
Rules. To bring the sea transport legal regime into line with commercial practice, its
successors (Visby,
94 Hamburg
95 and Rotterdam Rules
96 ) include a “container”
clause.
97 Container transport has continued to expand since 1990,
98 with a minor
decrease in 2009 during the economic crisis but rebounded in 2010.
99
88 OECD database on Statistics on Transport, Sea Container Transport (n.d.).
89 Nicholas (2010), pp. 113–117, paragraph 6.6 (stating that the containerisation of cargo allows for
ease of transit and reduced freight rates).
90 Schmelzer and Peavy (1970), p. 208.
91 Daudin (2003), pp. 411, 425.
92 Schmelzer and Peavy (1970), p. 208.
93 Huybrechts (2010), p. 119 (looking at the historic genesis of the rules on “package limitation”).
94 Visby Rules Article 4.5(c).
95 Hamburg Rules Article 6 ‘Limits of Liability’.
96 Rotterdam Rules Articles 59 and 60.
97 See also Sturley et al. (2010a, b, c, d), pp. 160–162, paragraphs 5.221–5.226.
98 UNCTAD (2012), pp. 21–23.
99 Ibid, 22, Figure 1.5 ‘Global container trade, 1990–2011’. Source: Drewry Shipping Consultants,
Container Market Review and Forecast 2008/09; Clarkson Research Services, Container Intelligence Monthly, May 2011. Note: The data for 2011 were obtained by applying growth rates
forecasted by Clarkson Research Services in Container Intelligence Monthly, May 2011.
Lex Maritima in a Changing World: Development and Prospect of. . .
771
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) statistics, sea
container transport kept increasing in all OECD countries except in Australia,
Canada and Belgium, where it fell sharply from the 1970s to about 1996, but started
to increase again after that period.
88
Through the use of containers, loading and discharging of cargoes was simplified.
The freight costs of loading and unloading a container were far less than those for
individual packages.
89 The container revolution eliminated the cost of unloading
freight from rail cars or trucks on trans-shipment to a ship.
90 It was estimated that
containerisation led to a decrease in transport costs of between 5 and 10% of the
goods’ values,
91 and it was also pointed out that the time for loading and unloading
was shortened from 3 days to approximately 8 h.
92 In short, freight rates and loading
times were both sharply reduced.
As a consequence, courts around the world spent decades trying to ascertain the
new meaning of “package” in containerized transport,
93 the principal issue being
whether a sealed container constitutes a single package under the original Hague
Rules. To bring the sea transport legal regime into line with commercial practice, its
successors (Visby,
94 Hamburg
95 and Rotterdam Rules
96 ) include a “container”
clause.
97 Container transport has continued to expand since 1990,
98 with a minor
decrease in 2009 during the economic crisis but rebounded in 2010.
99
88 OECD database on Statistics on Transport, Sea Container Transport (n.d.).
89 Nicholas (2010), pp. 113–117, paragraph 6.6 (stating that the containerisation of cargo allows for
ease of transit and reduced freight rates).
90 Schmelzer and Peavy (1970), p. 208.
91 Daudin (2003), pp. 411, 425.
92 Schmelzer and Peavy (1970), p. 208.
93 Huybrechts (2010), p. 119 (looking at the historic genesis of the rules on “package limitation”).
94 Visby Rules Article 4.5(c).
95 Hamburg Rules Article 6 ‘Limits of Liability’.
96 Rotterdam Rules Articles 59 and 60.
97 See also Sturley et al. (2010a, b, c, d), pp. 160–162, paragraphs 5.221–5.226.
98 UNCTAD (2012), pp. 21–23.
99 Ibid, 22, Figure 1.5 ‘Global container trade, 1990–2011’. Source: Drewry Shipping Consultants,
Container Market Review and Forecast 2008/09; Clarkson Research Services, Container Intelligence Monthly, May 2011. Note: The data for 2011 were obtained by applying growth rates
forecasted by Clarkson Research Services in Container Intelligence Monthly, May 2011.
Lex Maritima in a Changing World: Development and Prospect of. . .
771