Marine Law Case Study: Kyokuyo Co Ltd v A.P Moller – Maersk Analysis

This case study analyzes the legal dispute in Kyokuyo Co Ltd v A.P Moller – Maersk [2017], focusing on the application of the Hague and Hague-Visby Rules concerning the carriage of goods by sea. The plaintiff, Kyokuyo Co Ltd, claimed damages due to the condition of tuna delivered by Maersk. The case explores the interpretation of 'unit' in the context of bills of lading and the determination of liability limits. The judge, Andrew Baker, ruled in favor of the plaintiff, applying the Hague-Visby Rules where a bill of lading was obligatory or requested, even if a sea waybill was used. The decision also clarified that individually packaged items, even within a container, could be considered separate units for liability purposes. The analysis references relevant case law, including Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd [1954] and Studebaker Distributors Ltd v Chartlon Steam Shipping Co Ltd I 1937, to support the judgment's findings on the carrier's responsibilities and the application of the rules. This case provides insight into the complexities of marine law, especially in the context of international trade and the carriage of goods.

Running head: MARINE LAW
Marine Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1MARINE LAW
Kyokuyo Co Ltd v A.P Moller – Maersk [2017]
The case of Kyokuyo Co Ltd -v- A.P Moller – Maersk A/S [2017] EWHC 654 presents a
situation wherein the parties have disagreed on regulations application where the limits of
liability there under fell (Katsivela 2017).
In this case, the Plaintiff brought a claim against the defendant stating that there was a
cause of failure on the part of the defendant who had to supply the ordered tuna in such a
condition which were essentially required for maintain good quality (Goettlich 2015). When the
plaintiff had received the tuna, it was not in a packaged form. The claims that were stated by the
Plaintiff were made on the grounds that are governed by Article I to VIII of the Hague rules
taking into account any necessary accomplishment and application of the Hague-Visby rules.
After over viewing the issues of both the parties, the Judges concluded that where an issue of bill
was obligatory by the contract of carriage when asked in the same manner, the Hague-Visby
rules will be applied. Hague Rules and Hague-Visby rules are applicable in this particular case.
Andrew Baker, the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Kyokuyo Co Ltd. It was jointly agreed
upon the fact that the shipper was responsible for the care and carriage of the goods by sea that
was stuffed into the container during the process of preparation. The judge also ruled that the
submission to which there was no existent relation to the right of bill or landing and an
agreement that had been issued instead of a bill of landing (Aikens, Lord and Bools 2015).
Therefore, it was treated as a claim that failed to make demand for any material that was
irrelevant.
From the findings, it was extracted that in relation to the mandatory completion of
Hague-Visby rules should be implemented rather than The Hague rules in such situations where

2MARINE LAW
any form of damage arose related to the sea transit. In respect to this, it was considered by the
judges in which their judgment any substitute result with respect to the facts of the case
according to the provisions of the Hague rules. The judge stated that because of that whether the
Hague-Visby Rules will be applicable in the contract of carriage which was governed by a bill of
landing in compliance with Article I(b) of the Hague-Visby Rules, that made the Hague-Visby
rule applicable in relation to the law under Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1971. Later, the judges
came to this decision although a bill of lading was not being issued and whether a sea waybills
had been provided (Aikens, Lord and Bools 2015). The contract of carriage will still be governed
by the bill of lading as the shipper was entitled to ask for a bill of lading and the issue of waybills
made no difference. The decision of the judge also stated that on the fact that once the cargos
have been packed and they cannot be held as units in the case where they could be shipped
without any packaging (Zhao 2016). When the cargo was unpacked, it constituted of separate
items. The items that were considered to be units even if they could not be shipped in a container
(Hill 2017). For example, an expressed bill of lading term limiting the liability to $250 per
package that had no application to a cargo of 60 unboxed motor cars as seen in the case of
Studebaker Distributors Ltd v Chartlon Steam Shipping Co Ltd I 1937.
The judge in the case of Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd [1954] 2 QB 402
gave parallel judgment where it stated that Article 1(b) will be content and justified when the
contract of carriage is concluded (Goettlich 2015). It was also considered that in course of bill of
landing that has been produced in the form of draft, which is going to be issued. While the
argument was going on, Maersk Line explained and interpreted the meaning of the term unit in
Bills of Lading that referred to the container for containerized transport not for the purpose of
packaging tuna loins (Clarke 2014).

3MARINE LAW
The carrier hoped for a lower amount claimable compensation limit that was available to
the claimant. The language representation in the waybills that identify the individually packaged
frozen loins as the original inventory stuffed in the container should be on the basis of
compensation (Katsivela 2017). Concerning the case of Kyokuyo Co Ltd -v- A.P Moller –
Maersk A/S [2017] EWHC 654, the judge Andrew Baker gave the judgment for the plaintiff.

4MARINE LAW
References:
Zhao, L., 2016. The limited scope of seaborne cargo liability regime: new political–economic
environments in the 21st century. Maritime Policy & Management, 43(6), pp.748-762.
Aikens, R., Lord, R. and Bools, M., 2015. Bills of lading. CRC Press.
Goettlich, W., 2015. Interstate Interstitials: Bumper Stickers, Driver-Cars and the Spaces of
Social Encounter on Contemporary American Superhighways (Doctoral dissertation, Concordia
University).
Clarke, M.A., 2014. International carriage of goods by road: CMR. CRC Press.
Hill, D.J., 2017. CMR: contracts for the international carriage of goods by road. Routledge.
Katsivela, M., 2017. The treatment of the sea peril exception of the Hague-Visby Rules in
common law and civil law jurisdictions. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 16(1), pp.19-36.