ISRAEL Law and Practice Contributed by: Joseph Sprinzak and Rahel Rimon, J.SPRINZAK
3.4 Misdeclaration of Cargo In accordance with the Hague-Visby Rules, Arti - cle III(5), the shipper is deemed to have guar - anteed to the carrier the accuracy at the time of shipment of the marks, number, quantity and weight, as furnished by them, and the shipper is required to indemnify the carrier against all loss, damages and expenses arising or resulting from inaccuracies in such particulars. The right of the carrier to this indemnity in no way limits the latter’s responsibility and liability under the contract of carriage to any person other than the shipper. It should be noted that, as part of the effort to deal with safety problems at sea and on shore arising from incorrect declarations of weight of containers, Israel has taken steps through its Port Regulations to ensure the reliability of weights of containers by scrutinising the SOLAS VGM (Verified Gross Mass) declarations issued by shippers, as well as the weighing of all trucks entering the port. 3.5 Time Bar for Filing Claims for Damaged or Lost Cargo Israel has adopted the Hague-Visby Rules by vir - tue of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Ordinance 1926, as amended in 1992. In accordance with these Rules, the limitation period for filing a claim against a maritime carrier for damage/shortage of cargo is one year from the date of arrival of the cargo at its destination or from the date the cargo was due to reach its destination. This limi - tation period also applies to subrogation claims brought by insurance companies. As noted, Israel has incorporated the Hague-Vis - by Rules into its law. In accordance with Article III 6 of the Rules, subject to paragraph 6 bis, the carrier and the vessel shall in any event be dis - charged from all liability whatsoever in respect
of the goods, unless suit is brought within one year of their delivery or of the date when they should have been delivered. According to Israeli case law, the time bar is not merely a procedural matter but a substantive right, and the limitation period may therefore only be extended if the par - ties agree to this voluntarily. It will be recalled that Article 6 bis provides that an action for indemnity against a third person may be brought, even after the expiry of a year, if brought within the time allowed by the law of the court seized of the case; however, the time allowed shall be not less than three months, commencing from the day when the person bringing such an action for indemnity has set - tled the claim or has been served with process in the action against themselves. In the Supreme Court case ALA 9444/00 Bellina Maritime SA Monrovia v Menorah Insurance Co Ltd, the Court held that a subrogated insurer cannot benefit from the provisions of Article III 6A of the Rules (namely, the provision that forms an exception to the short prescription period of one year set out in Article III 6). 4. Maritime Liens and Ship Arrests 4.1 Ship Arrests Israel is not a party to either the 1952 or the 1999 Arrest Conventions. For historical reasons, the jurisdiction of the Israeli Admiralty Court is equivalent to that applied by the English High Court of Admiralty in 1890. Similarly, the admiralty practice is that set out in the Vice-Admiralty Rules of 1883. It is to be noted that the Admiralty Court’s material jurisdiction under the English Admiralty
270 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook