Author: Ira Pal, Amity Law School, Amity University, Lucknow
To the Point
International law on maritime search and rescue (SAR) faces several critical issues. While conventions like UNCLOS, SOLAS, and the SAR Convention impose a clear duty on states and shipmasters to rescue persons in distress at sea, enforcement mechanisms remain weak. A major problem arises with disembarkation, as international law does not specify which state must allow rescued persons to disembark, leading to disputes and delays. This challenge is intensified when rescues involve refugees and migrants, as states often prioritize border control over humanitarian obligations. Overlapping or unclear SAR zones further complicate jurisdiction and responsibility, sometimes causing dangerous delays in response. Additionally, the principle of non-refoulement under international refugee law prohibits returning individuals to places where they may face persecution, yet states frequently resist accepting such obligations. Finally, the absence of clear rules on burden sharing creates political and financial disputes, especially in large-scale rescue operations, leaving some states disproportionately affected.
Abstract
The composition examines and discusses that delivery of goods is the most significant obligation of carriers and is one of the core issues about Carriage of Goods by Sea. The carriers’ scores under the contract are to be discharged after the delivery of goods is complete. Although delivery of goods is one of the most important aspects of transnational Carriages of Goods by Sea, some vittles have scarcities according to the transnational conventions, regarding the Carriages of Goods by Sea before the ratification of the Rotterdam Rules, like The Hague Rules, which are also known as The Hague-Visby Rules and the Hamburg Rules. The abecedarian differences in these Rules are seen in composition 3(6) of the Hague Rules and the Hague-Visby Rules. Likewise, the provisions about the notice of loss, damage, or detention of goods are seen under the Hamburg Rules.
Introduction
Delivery of goods is the most significant obligation of carriers and is one of the core issues about Carriage of Goods by Sea. The carriers’ scores under the contract are to be discharged after the delivery of goods is complete. Although delivery of goods is one of the most important aspects of transnational Carriages of Goods by Sea, some vittles’ have scarcities according to the transnational conventions, regarding the Carriages of Goods by Sea before the ratification of the Rotterdam Rules. like The Hague Rules, which are also known as The Hague-Visby Rules and the Hamburg Rules. The abecedarian differences in these Rules are seen in composition 3(6) of The Hague Rules and The Hague- Visby Rules 1; likewise, the provisions about the notice of loss, damage, or detention of goods are seen under the Hamburg Rules. As shipping is one of the most focused practices in the modern world, it needs to have further certainty in the rules and the Rules that govern Shipping Law. As antithetical to the major maritime countries, India is still governed by the Bill of Lading Act, Carriages of Goods by Sea Act, and the Multimodal Transportation of Goods Act, containing the general bills like Contract Law, etc. The Constitution of India, which is the supreme law, also functions with the Common Law Rules and incorporates the Hague Rules.
The History of Carrier’s Liability
The carrier’s liability governance in England was, for many times former to the current state of the road, as it was regarded as one of the most accessible means of transportation, and transportation by road was comparatively slow, precarious, and dangerous. Due to this reason, the Carriages of Goods by Sea laws were made to govern earlier than the other transportation systems. The English law was influenced by Roman law, but it did not flourish very well. As far as the carrier’s liabilities are concerned, they deal substantially with the contractual forms that concentrate on depositing and hiring services for goods. By the sixteenth century, the liability of the carrier was looked at by presumed fault rather than strict liability. This liability mode was adopted by numerous countries, and the nautical courts made analogous opinions to the trade.
The system grew and the contract of carriages by the registered vessels re-emerged, which gave birth to a damage that was for the identification of the delivery of goods. The law for carriers’ liability and obligation was the Rules under the civil law in the sixteenth century. By the morning of the seventeenth century, there was damage, which had some insertion of clauses made by the master known as the Bill of Lading. This law didn’t give sufficient vittles for the carriers; thus, by the end of the seventeenth century Common Law was regarded as one of the most significant laws. Its relation to the carrier and its client goes back to the time when there was no other applicable form of transportation, and the carrier’s obligation wasn’t only to deliver the goods but also to deliver them safely in good condition. This was regarded as an obligation that arose under the contract between the parties. The history of Carriage of Goods by Sea Shipping and Seaborne trade is the oldest form of International Commercial trade in India. India is one of the foremost maritime countries in the world. In ancient times, abysses were freely used for deals arising out of transnational trade. The history of Carriages of Goods by Sea in India can be traced back to the Vedic period, where the textbook of Manu illustrated the Rules related to maritime transport, and Kautilya’s Artha Sastra dealt with shipping and affiliated matters. Colourful textbooks in ancient India formulated colourful canons. The laws of Macassar and Malacca are the two important textbooks related to maritime law, wherein their vittles were espoused from Indian textbooks. Colourful laws, conventions, Rules, and regulations govern the contracts, rights, and arrears of the carrier in India. India passed the Carriages of Goods by Sea Act in the time 1925, after it espoused the Brussels Convention on Maritime Law, which contained invariant Rules of Bill of Lading deduced from The Hague Rules 1924. The Carriages of Goods Act, 1925, governs the shipping of goods from one harbourage in India to another harbourage in India or outside India.
Definition of a Carrier under different Conventions and Carriages of Goods by Sea
Visby Rules define the carrier as the person who convinces the proprietor or the bailee who enter a contract with a shipper. The carrier has also been linked as the person who has the name in the contract of Carriages of Goods by Sea that concludes the shipper. This convention has also defined a factual carrier as a person to whom the enactment of the carriage of goods, or part of the carriages, has been delegated by the carrier, and made any other person to whom similar performance has been entrusted. Composition 1(5) of the United Nations Convention on Contract for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or incompletely by Sea has also given its definition of a carrier.
Description of Carrier
When goods are packed on a chartered vessel for a consignee, they face specific difficulties if the weight is lost or damaged. Therefore, the carrier must be linked to where the weight claims can be conducted and establish a defined term in the contract of carriage. The Bill of Lading is to be signed by the boat’s master as an agent of the boat owner and can be issued in the name of the duty, sub-charter, boat owner, or the agent, as
the assignee needs to make a correct decision as to which person he must sue. As only one party is liable for the contract of carriages under English law. also, if Hague Rules govern the contract of Hague-Visby Rules, weight claims are set to be on time under Composition 3 Rule 6, except that the claim is made within the prescribed period of 12 months. Carriage of Goods by Sea is constantly the final step in a contract for the trade of goods. The shipper is constantly the dealer of weight. The ultimate consignee is constantly the buyer of the weight. The trouble and title to the goods will constantly pass during the contract of carriage. There is a general presumption that title passes when trouble passes, but this is a rebuttable presumption. The exact point at which trouble and title pass depends on the terms of the contract of trade and the intention of the parties.
Contract of Affreightment
A contract to carry goods by ocean is called the contract of affreightment, and the consideration or charges paid for the carriage is called the freight. A contract of affreightment may take either of the two forms
i) a duty party, where an entire boat, or a top part of a boat, is placed at the disposal of a dealer known as a duty; A duty party may be for a particular period, or for a particular passage.
ii) a bill of lading where the goods are to be carried on a general boat, and the person consigning the goods is known as a shipper.
Seaworthiness
When goods are to be carried by ocean, the fitness of the vessel that is to do so is obviously a matter of concern to any person who has an interest in the goods. At common law, it’s an unvoiced term of the contract that the boat shall be seaworthy. A boat isn’t seaworthy if it has a defect that a prudent owner would have demanded to be remedied before transferring the boat to the ocean. This demand is absolute; the boat must be seaworthy, and it is not enough that every breach of the inferred term, the carrier can not calculate on a clause exculpating him from liability for some cause of loss or damage unless the loss/ damage was caused by unseaworthiness. On the other hand, under the Hague- Visby Rules, the carrier is liable ahead and now of the passage, to exercise due diligence to make the boat seaworthy, properly man, equip, and supply the boat, and to make the weight spaces fit and safe for the event, carriage, and preservation of goods.
The Multi-Modal Transportation of Goods Act, 1993
The Multi-Modal Transportation of Goods Act, 1993, was legislated to regulate the business of multi-modal deals and allocate the liabilities and risks to the multi-modal transport drivers. Till the time the goods are in the possession of the driver, he’ll be held liable for similar goods. Also, he’ll be liable for detention in the delivery of the consignment and consequential loss for causing similar detention if similar detention or loss occurs whilst he’s in charge of the consignment. still, the multimodal transportation driver can exempt his liability if he can prove that the loss, damage, or detention in delivery was caused because of his or his agents’ or retainers’ negligence.
Conclusion
Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) is a foundation of transnational law, ensuring the protection of mortal life at sea. Despite strong fabrics like UNCLOS and the SAR Convention, issues of lapping governance, limited coffers, and political enterprises weaken perpetuation. Greater cooperation and clearer liabilities are pivotal to making SAR more effective and upholding its philanthropic purpose.
At the same time, evolving challenges such as irregular migration, climate change, and increased maritime business demand stronger collaboration between countries and transnational associations. Addressing these enterprises with practical measures and renewed commitment will ensure that the philanthropic spirit of SAR remains central to global maritime governance.
FAQs
What scores should be assessed on the carriers regarding limitations, exceptions, duties, burden of evidence, and Bill of Lading that will affect the Carriage of Goods by Sea?
Carriers should be obliged to uphold a clear and fair balance of liabilities under the Carriage of Goods by Sea frame by clinging to limitations of liability only when they can prove the absence of negligence and due diligence in vessel seaworthiness, weight care, and proper attestation. Exceptions to liability, like acts of God or war, should be interpreted to help the abuse, and the burden of evidence for these exceptions must rest on the carrier. The Bill of Lading should serve as conclusive substantiation of damage and contract terms, guarding the rights of shippers and consignees. Carriers must also ensure transparency and responsibility through accurate Bills of Lading, and any deviation or misstatement should render them liable. These scores ensure trust, effectiveness, and legal certainty in maritime commerce.
Do the current laws of India give effective remedies to cover the rights of the weight possessors?
Yes, Indian laws give several provisions to cover the rights of weight possessors. crucial legislation includes:
• Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 – governs rights and arrears in ocean transport, incorporating Hague Rules.
• Indian Contract Act, 1872 – ensures the enforcement of contractual rights.
• Carriage by Air Act, 1972 – protects weight possessors in air transport.
If India ratifies the international conventions, is there an expected change for the improvement of the Rules that govern the carrier’s obligations?
Yes, ratifying international conventions would enhance carrier obligations, increase liability for loss or damage, and provide stronger protection to cargo owners. It would also bring Indian laws in line with global standards, reduce legal ambiguities, and facilitate smoother international trade. Moreover, it would improve uniformity in dispute resolution and boost confidence among foreign traders and investors.
References
Binita Shrikant Hathi, Ship Arrest in India, India PR wire, eighth edition [2014]
“The scope of application of Hamburg Rules and Hague-Visby Rules: A comparison”
[1992] ICCLR.
Davies M, “The elusive carrier: whom do I sue and how?” [1991] Australian Business LR 230.
David Chong Gek Sian, Unravelling the identity of the carrier’ 1994 6 Sac LJ 182.
