Aspects of maritime law: claims under bills of lading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maritime law has an international character. The practicing lawyer will be confronted with international conventions and other international instruments containing uniform law. It is broadly acknowledged that such instruments should be construed and applied uniformly. Therefore, knowledge of foreign judgments is imperative.This book contains an extensive comparative law study of English, American and Dutch law concerning the construction of the Hague Visby Rules. Australian and Canadian law has been discussed where relevant. The authors have attempted to present law at an academic level in a way which will be useful to the practicing lawyer. Lawyers dealing with shipments passing through the major European ports of The Netherlands will especially appreciate the book's emphasis on Dutch law, which has a broader scope of application than one might expect. Dutch law is often mandatorily applicable when cargo is discharged at a port in The Netherlands, and Dutch courts are obliged to apply Dutch law to questions of who can claim or sue and who can be sued under a bill of lading. Dutch law also applies to ship arrest and the release of vessels against security, the right to conduct a survey (including the question of which documents should be disclosed), and the enforced sale of vessels in the Netherlands. Other matters discussed in this book are global limitation of liability, the applicability of the Hague Visby Rules in the Netherlands and electronic bills of lading.This book will be of interest to practitioners working in this very specialised field, as well as to students of comparative law. It will be of particularly practical value to anyone dealing with cargo damage, ship arrest or litigation in the Netherlands.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".