Transport of goods through sea is an integral part of international commerce.

This transport is
conducted in compliance with the multifaceted legal framework that comprises rules and
regulations as well as contracts. The parties involved in those transactions, such as those which
shippers, carriers, and charterers have, must have a full knowledge of the legal principles and the
possible repercussions. While this discussion is meant to provide legal guidance and analysis
under the Borisov law for three hypothetical situations involving carriage of goods disputes, it
brings to the attention the need to follow the laws and contractual regulations.

The legal regime comprises international conventions like the Hague-Visby Rules and,
nationally, legislations and shipping customs. Following the rules of these regulations is vital.
Otherwise, the consequences will be dire, and these may include penalties that can go as far as
losing money, cargo damage claims, and even potential legal disputes. In this paper, I will
examine the ramifications of applying contractual agreements, legal principles, and practical
implications on parties involved in such situations by exploring the respective scenarios.

B. It is important to understand legal principles and implications in order to avoid

potential legal claims or liabilities.

Since the ocean carriage of goods is quite an intricate and challenging area of expertise in terms
of the applicable law, it is of utmost importance for all the stakeholders to be well-prepared in
this regard and to know the legal principles of such a system better. Adherence to the existing
laws, regulations, and contractual arrangements is essential. Otherwise, it may lead to serious
losses financially, a shortage of cargo delivery, or protracted legal disputes.

Identifying carriers´ duties and the possible liabilities they can confront is key to reducing risks
and being compliant. While things are different for the shippers and the charterers, they must
both know their rights and responsibilities to provide protections and seek remedies in case of
breaches or other conflicts.

C. Thesis statement

The present task aims to present an ample study of the three scenarios that could emerge in
disagreements on the carriage of goods, demonstrating the complex interaction between contract
agreements, the law, and the rights and obligations of the parties involved. This paper intends to
accomplish its objective by inspecting various scenarios from the angle of relevant laws,
regulations, and industry practices to show how confusing the environment can be for the one
who wants to run a successful business in the meantime and making practical recommendations
for the entrepreneurs who want to avoid running into these problems and overcome them if that
has unfortunately already happened.

With the use of detailed analysis in a complex area associated with the liability of all parties
involved in the transport of goods by sea, this paper provides proof of the fact that success in this
process is impossible without the knowledge of how maritime law is executed. Eventually, the
aim is two-fold: on the one hand, to provide the readers with a comprehensive view of this area
and, on the other hand, to help them gain access to the information and tools they can rely upon
in the decision-making process of international maritime trade.
II. Question 1: Proposing Robert to the Nitrogen Fertilizer Cargo Dispute

A. What is the background of the shipment and the actual content of the contract?

1. My agreement with Sophie to supply her with fertilizer was initially reached.

Captain Charles, who was the owner of the ship LADY HELENA, made a deal with Sophie
where 100 bags of fertilizer were to be loaded at Liverpool, England, and shipped to New York
in the USA. Our freight contract was definite £100,000; freight calculation was contingent upon
either end of what was referred to as "loading completed at Liverpool"

2. It included the ship's name and the name of the master, as well as detailed notes on the cargo
he was about to carry.

Lady Helen's Captain, signed at Liverpool and received by Sophie, had the bill of lading with the
description made: "A hundred black bags, fully clean on board, in the cargo hold no. 2.
"Importantly, the document declared, "The Hague Visby Rules are not applicable to this contract
of carriage" regarding the governing law.

3. Midport port diversion for repairs and cargo damage is becoming part of the usual routine.

Despite the in-voyage storm, the hatch cover of cargo hold no. 2 suffered extensive structural
damage. 2. Eventually, the Captain opted to have the ship divert to Midport for major repairs that
consumed four weeks. On reaching New York, it was found that a number of fertilizers were
leaking, thereby leaving a messy product spillage along the interior part of cargo compartment
no. 2. It became evident that the fertilizer combination contained a corrosive part, possibly the
cause of that bag choice and non-use.

A. Legal concept review

1. Consignment of the Hague/Visby Regulations.

Hague-Visby rules are the international convention that determines the legal scope and bounds of
offenders and property owners in the channel of commodities by means of sea. The B/L says that
these rules don't apply, but it should be remembered that the United Kingdom is a Hague-Visby
Rules contracting state. Therefore, the Rules may still exist in the contract of carriage concerning
either specific circumstances or the interpretation of the respective clauses.

2. The Carrier's duties and obligations should also be stated here.

As per Hague-Visby Rules and General Principles of the carriage of goods sec, there is a duty on
the shipment side to make the vessel sea-worthy, man it properly, supply and equip, and befit the
parts of the ship like holds, smell, and cool chambers for transportation of goods (Article III,
Rule 1). Furthermore, quarantine comes to responsibility for adequate and sensitive loading,
handling, stowing, carrying, storing, caring for, and discharging goods (Article III, rule 3).

With that in mind, Charles might argue that the diversion to Midport for repair was a valid
provision for the raging storm that was brought by the weather, which was covered by Article IV
under Rule 2(c) of Hague-Visby Rules. However, the inability of the carrier's liability for the
cargo hold damage and fertilizer bags being leaked out may still occur if the court concludes that
the carrier didn't have its due diligence when the cargo hold and packaging suitability were really
involved in the corrosive nature of the fertilizer.

3. If something happens with the cargo, the liability will determiningly fall on to the cargo
owner.

The shipper, Sophie, who is obligated to offer clear and full information on the nature of goods
to the carrier, fell short of the duty. If this is not exploited, it often leads to liability for damage or
loss in any case of liability. It could be determined that Sophie had been aware of the detrimental
effect of the fertilizer, but she did not notify Charles and give proper storage instructions. This
might lead to her being sued for the cargo hold being discriminated against and leaking fertilizer
sacks.

C. Recommendations for Charles

1. Sophie will sue Mr. Trachsel if he refuses to pay for the damage and harm.

For that reason, Charles must lodge a claim of damages against Sophie for the price of repairing
his cargo hold (No. ). B, which was affected by the water from the broken fertilizer bags. He
would say in this case that Sophie's failure to communicate more precisely the destructive nature
of fertilizer gave the crew the reason for using inappropriate packaging, and, as a consequence,
the cargo hold suffered damage.

2. Pause for a wife to taste a word. 's' response to what she has realized

Concerning Sophie's netting of £25,000 from the £100,000 freight payment agreed upon, Charles
should examine the contract to check that the terms are indeed in force and that the laws that
apply are within the image. This being the case, Charles may consider that the stormy weather-
induced diversion to Midport for repair was a valid cause for the delay, and so the receiver
should pay the detention costs. Hence, the cargo destruction was not either caused by neglect or
by the fault of the carrier.

Although such a possibility needs to become clearer, if in case it is shown that Charles failed to
exercise a type of care known as diligence in the prior shipping assurance, Sophie may be able to
reduce the customer shipping fee through a deduction of some amount in proportion to the delay
and the damages in cargo. Charles should take the service of a maritime attorney for a better
assessment of his case, and then should be able to settle Sophie with a fair solution among
themselves.

III. Question 2: Delivering Carmen's Implication of Cargo Dispute Concerning Pistachio Nuts.

A. Brief overview of a charter boarding and a voyage description.

1. Including a charter agreement between Ramon and Carmen

Ramon engaged in a business venture with Carmen for a length of time equal to six months
aboard his ship MAR AZUL. The charterparty included an off-hire clause, stating: "In case of
loss of time because of berthing, equipment breakdown, honest detention by warehouse keeper
while assorting the cargos or anything incidents that makes the ship not in full action during
operation, the payment of hire shall cease for the time thereby lost. "

2. Trip from Los Angeles to Algiers via Panama Canal

MAR AZUL was sent to Los Angeles from Europe to stuff up 100,000 bags of Persian nuts and
forward them to Algiers via the Panama Canal. In Los Angeles, the work on cargo loading came
about without any disturbances.

3. These incidents form a really critical part of my air travel experience and in other of my life
challenges.

When the ship MAR AZUL arrived at the Panama Canal, it suffered a grounding that most likely
resulted from malfunctioning steering equipment or maybe due to another reason. To keep going
with the refloating operation, about 900 bags of pistachio kernels had to be removed and then
backloaded again for a period, which also contributed to delays. MAR AZUL shifted from its
position in the line to get the Panama Canal transit stipulated and waited more days for
authorization to enter. The Panama Canal Authority required slowing down as a result of the
congestion, adding to the shippers' frustration and more delays. Ultimately, the arrival at Algiers
was similar to the previous delay due to the fog, which temporarily stopped the captain from
docking the boat on the official discharging berth.

According to the confidential source, FIFA has been heavily criticized for failing to address
various legal issues involving its employees.

1. Implication of the Off-hire clause and payment of hire.

The provision concerning the off-hire clause in the charter party is very ther differentiated that
matters a lot in whether hire charges should be continued or not to the shipowner while the boat
is unable to deliver services during a case where it breaks, goes into dry dock, or waits for
loading or unloading at the ports among others. In this, a while, type clause is mentioned which
will arrest the hiring when ships or cargoes are damaged by average accident, detention by
prevalent accidents to ship or cargo, or by any other reason which can discontinue the full
working of the vessel.

The laying-up of MAR AZUL and the consequent ongoing of the offloading operation, being in
the middle of the Canal queue list, and restriction of the operating line speed eventually give rise
to the off-hire clause that grants Carmen compensation for deduction or only hiatus of shore
payments during the time lost.

2. Cargo Ship responsibilities and Also Liability.

Not to mention, Ramon must be vigilant so that he can identify any risks, for instance, if there
are issues with the steering gear or the overall seaworthiness of the vessel. Should the
responsibility fall on faulty steering gear, which is the case in this case, Ramon would have to
cover any delay-related expenses that would come with such a gear failure.

But an occasional delay, such as congestion at Panama channel or fog at Algiers port, may be
called incidents completely uncontrollable by the carrier, and when it happens, the carrier is not
obliged to prepare for it.

3. An important part of an agreement between charterers and owners is the division of each
party's responsibilities and rights.

As the Charterer, Carmen ought to be sure that the vessel will be available and capable of
carrying out the contracted services during the period of the voyage. If Carmen reports the off-
hire provision, she is likely to be entitled to subtract or pause on making the hire payments
because of the delays caused by the grounding.

C. Recommendations for Carmen

1. Off-hire may be seen as a claim or defense against the problematic policy.

Carmen shall have a look at and take into consideration the explicit wording of the off-hire
arrangement as well as the reasons for the stranding occurrence and the consequent delay. If the
investors can confirm that the faulty steering gear, that is, the equipment of the vessel, was the
issue that made the ship grounded, that could be a strong case for appealing to the off-hire clause
and recovering hire payments for lost time.

On the other hand, certain delays do not come within the jurisdiction of the off-hire clause, one
of which is the delay of the situation due to congestion of traffic at the Panama Canal or fog at
Algiers. These delays cannot justify Carmen's deductions. Carmen, a maritime attorney, should
be sought to analyze her case and help decide if a legal action will be fruitless.

2. Postponing and recovering the sum of money in case of shifts.

The fact that Carmen`s ship will be on-hire or will not be associated with the sort-out grounding
is still of great importance. Carmen should remember to record, count, and value together all
project delays, cost increases, and potential damages and losses incurred during the process. This
documentation will be a primary tool in bolstering the agency's behavior, whether these are
claims or further negotiations with Ramon.

In addition, Carmen might consider the feasibility of filing a claim against the Autoridad de
Canal de Panama and other involved agencies that can bear some kind of responsibility in terms
of time losses or damages, for instance, those that can induce speed restrictions or traffic
congestion.

IV. Question 3: Counseling, Giorgio on the Rice Cargo Dispute Format error: Only images
allowed.

A. The voyage itinerary and the background of the charter.

1. Contract letter for transportation of rice cargo.

Alfred chartered his vessel LITTLE MARY to Giorgio for the intended trip load of bulk rice to
be delivered from Kolkata, India, to the uniport six at Hull, UK. The terms of the charter where
Giorgio, as the Charterer, was granted five days laytime for unloading the merchandise in Hull
was clearly stated on the voyage charter party. A £5000 daily rate was arranged for demurrage,
and a £2500 daily rate was despatch.

2. On the one hand, NOOVERTIME AND LEGTIME CLAUSES are the most vital issues for
the Charterer.

The charterparty read like this: If the vessel is in or not in berth at Hull, then the Notice of
Readiness (WIBON) must be tendered during office hours. FOUR DAYS later, LITTLE MARY
called at Hull on a Sunday morning, followed by anchorage at Thornwick Bay (Spurn Head),
outside the port limits, due to heavy congestion. The captain discharged their respective NOs
before they were handed over to the agent (Giorgio).

3. Spurn Head and the cargo rotting

It was two months that LITTLE MARY patiently waited at Spurn Head for her boat place to be
finished, and at last, it appeared: berth 6! During this period, the rice deteriorated in the ship's
cargo hold because it was delayed for a long period to be unloaded. A discharge let the rice
owner, Marco, sue the captain, Alfredo, for payment as the cereals were all damaged.

B. Study of the disputable legal matters.

1. Time of Notice of Readiness validity. Forming a Clear Narrative with Empathy Instruction:
Transform the given sentence into a grammatically correct one while maintaining its original
meaning. Model: While transparency may not directly guarantee a stable and equitable financial
system, it serves as a prerequisite for building public trust and improving systemic resilience.

The validity of the BOOKER'S notice given by the CAPTAIN of the LITTLE MARY while
anchored at Spurn Head is of the utmost significance in the decision of whether the vessel can
start the laytime or not. Potential claims of demurrage will be involved later. Normally, a 'Notice
of Readiness' must be accepted by the Charterer when the vessel arrives at its destination and
shall be ready to unload the cargo.

Nevertheless, this charter party, in this scenario, allowed the Readiness for Notice to be qualified
'whether in berth or not' (WIBO). The concerned provision probably meant that the Hour's
Laytime stated at Spurn Head, the port of loading, may be taken into account and deemed to be
the running time for laytime.

2. Demurrage and laytime may be those of laytime and demurrage calculations

Since the Notification of Readiness is usually declared valid, the lift time calculations and
determination of the demurrage claims will fall under the charter party specifications and
industry practices regulatory issues. The offer date of the Notice of Readiness would trigger the
five-day standstill period irrespective of the ship's waiting at Spurn Head, i.e., the period would
not count regardless of its loading at Spurn Head.

If Giorgio's liner berth time of 6 exceeds the specified five days, he could potentially claim hip-
deep demurrage (per day) at the agreed and contracted rate of £5,000 per day. Basically, Alfredo
would be compensated for the time the vessel waited for Giorgio if the discharge, which was to
be complete within the laytime period, was only partially done. He could claim the despatch
money from Alfredo as the agreed rate was £2,500 per day.

3. Costs, liabilities, and indemnity payments that are cargo damage related are one of the risks.

The proceeding of the rice cargo with all the spoilage at the Spurn Head is subject to
responsibility as well as some compensation. Alfredo, as the agent, will take responsibility for
caring for and preserving the item in case there are inevitable detentions while the journey
proceeds.

The shipment that went through Spurn Head and was delayed for two months may be regarded as
a one-time or extraordinary situation, which should free him of his duty for the damage caused to
the

cargo load, and this will depend on the provisions of the contractual agreement and the existing
rule of law.

Alreddo may become liable to pay for the damages if Marco, the proprietor of the rice cargo,
institutes a claim against him. Sometimes, the interaction between parties degenerates into
adversarial positions, and this is the case observed in negotiations between Alfredo, who intends
to sue Giorgio for any costs paid to Marco, and Giorgio, who failed to promptly unload, resulting
in an act of accommodation on Giorgio's part.

C. Recommendations for Giorgio

1. Answer given to the claim of freight and indemnify the cargo loss.

Giorgio should write down a list of the charter party clauses he has to consider, especially those
describing the validity of the Notice of Readiness, laytime calculations, and the potential
liabilities for cargo damage.

Suppose the acceptable Notice of Readiness produced at Spurn Head is to be considered

adequate. In that case, Giorgio might be responsible to pay Alfredo demurrage payments for any
extra days from time of arrival at berth number six until the discharge is concluded.

Whatever occurred to Marco regarding the stowage at Spurn Head Point and the possible claims
for lack of rice cargo, Giorgio should study and do research. Manuel, faced with an unreasonable
delay, may claim denial of the liability, and thus, Alfredo could not claim indemnity.

2. This could include defenses or counterclaims regarding the content of this topic. Alternatively,
it could also function as an impartial information relayer.
Giordano could focus on the probable defenses or the alternative claim that are all within the
jurisdiction of the voyage, as well as other actors involved. To illustrate, for instance, if the delay
at Spurn Head resulted from reasons out of Alfredo's domain, like container congestion in the
ports or decisions by port boards, Giorgio may be questioned if such causes should place Alfredo
responsible for the damages.

Furthermore, Giorgio has to study the exact provision of the charter party contract as well as
laws that may be relevant in order to identify whether any conditions limit/ or exclude liability
for cargo damage.

It will be wise to consult a maritime lawyer to evaluate the strength of his position against the
demurrage claim and cargo damage indemnity. The lawyer can help him build a suitable
strategy.

V. Conclusion

A. Finding key points and ways forward.

According to our analysis, the first and second situations, when it comes to the carriage of goods
disputes, indicate the complexity of both contractual obligations and basic legal principles, with
all the parties' responsibilities and rights.

Concerning the fertilizer cargo dispute, it is likely that one party will claim compensation for
repair damages from the other owing to the fact that none of them disclosed the corrosive nature
of the cargo, while the other person may be justified in taking away freight payment if the other
party did not exercise diligence.

In relation to the pistachio wild cargo, Carmen's right to suspend hire and declare a lay-time
under an off-hire clause or clause will be based on the specific wording of the clause and the
circumstances surrounding the grounding and subsequent delays.

The rice cargo case involved determining the Notice of Readiness factuality and the reasonability
of the leeway provided at Spurn Head. This in turns depended on the progress of the demurrage
claims and cargo and indemnity liabilities restitution.

B. Understanding the legal principles serve as a wise move in carriage of the goods.

Thus, these three scenarios is nothing but just the clear red signal of in-depth study on the legal
principles and application for the goods being shipped by sea. Deliberate interaction with
authorities, the state conventions and corresponding juridical agreements is essential for
preventing financial losses, cargo damage claims and prolonged legal disputes.

C. "On my suggestion; continue the study about the indefinite age of civilizations".

The accused, therefore, summarizes the points in last paragraph based on the given already
provided details. However, more study with further analysis may be necessary so, to address the
additional complexities of the given scenarios. Professional assistants experienced in maritime
laws and experts in the field of law will be very helpful in getting the whole picture of the
jurisdiction and norms of the industry as well as the strategies of how to win.

Moreover, along with adapting to evolving legal framework as well as industry procedures, it is
vital to conduct regular monitoring so as to be aware of any recent changes or advancements that
may influence the detranslation and assessment of the laws and regulations in force as they apply
to the carriage of cargo.

References

Brew Movers. (2023, September 2). Damaged cargo claims and process | Brew Movers.
https://brewmovers.com/resources/cargo-claims/

Alpega Group. (n.d.). What is a carrier and what is its role? | Teleroute. (C) Alpega Group.
https://teleroute.com/en-en/resources/glossary/carrier/

Admin. (2024, May 3). Ship Deck Cargo Risks and responsibilities | HandyBulk. HandyBulk.
https://www.handybulk.com/ship-deck-cargo-risks-and-responsibilities/

Section 1 Cargo liabilities – P&I Rules and Exceptions. (n.d.).

https://rulesandexceptions.swedishclub.com/part-two-comments/chapter-2-risks-covered/rule-4-
liabilities-in-respect-of-cargo/section-1-cargo-liabilities-2/
Off-hire issues. (n.d.). Shipowners.
https://www.shipownersclub.com/latest-updates/publications/hire-issues/

Manaadiar, H. (2023, November 5). Difference between Demurrage, Detention and Despatch.
Shipping and Freight Resource. https://www.shippingandfreightresource.com/demurrage-
detention-and-despatch/

Yen, T. P. (2022, April 25). Laytime and demurrage – Maritime Law Malaysia.
https://www.maritimelaw.com.my/2022/04/25/laytime-and-demurrage/