Contract of/for Carriage

1. For the early part of my carrier, I was unable to distinguish the difference between “of” and “for”, particularly, when it was used either for Contract of or for Carriage. This may be understandable given that English is not my mother tongue/native language. The purpose of this article is to highlight the subtle difference between “of” and “for” in the context mentioned above.
2. A search in ChatGPT on the difference between “of” and “for” reveals that both these words are prepositionsⁱ but are used in different contexts.
   1. “Of“ indicates possession, belonging or connection
   2. “For“ indicates purpose or intended use.
3. Sometimes, the words “Contracts of Carriage” and “Contracts for Carriage” are used interchangeably. However, they have a subtle difference, namely:
   1. Contract of Carriage is basically a legal agreement between a Carrier and Cargo interests in which each party’s rights, duties/responsibilities and liabilities are detailed. In the context of sea carriage, the common example of a contract of carriage is a Bill of Lading issued by the Carrier;
   2. Contracts for Carriage, on the other hand, is a contract for the purpose of carriage of goods. Common examples of such contracts are both Time Charterparties and Contracts of Affreightmentⁱⁱ (“COA”). These contracts are broader than both a Voyage Charterparty and a Bill of Lading and may include the Contract of Carriage.
4. Application of Carriage Conventions: There are various sea carriage conventions such as the Hague Rules, the Hague Visby Rules, the Hamburg Rules and the Rotterdam Rules. Both the Hague and the Hague Visby Rules are similar except for some provisions including the limitation regime. Given the predominance of the Hague Visby Rules (“HVR”) in carriage contracts, this articles considers only their application:.
   1. The HVR automatically applies when the Bill of Lading (“B/L”) is issued in or the shipment is effected from a Signatory country, or the B/L provides for the application of the law of a Signatory country. Of course, the HVR applies contractually if the B/L includes a Clause Paramount. All Charterparties and Bills of Lading commonly include a Clause Paramountⁱⁱⁱ providing for the application of the HVR if it is not compulsorily applicable.
   2. With respect to Claims, Art III r VI of HVR provides for a time limit of 1 year from delivery or the date when the cargo should have been delivered in respect of the goods, unless time is preserved (say by initiating a claim process either in the courts or, where arbitration is the agreed mode of dispute resolution, by arbitration).
   3. The question would be whether in the case of Contracts for Carriage i.e. Time Charterparties, the time limit of 1 year would also apply. We submit that given the wordings of both the Clause Paramount (as stated in 4(i) above) and the HVR, the time bar would only apply for claims in respect of the goods i.e. cargo and not related to other aspects such as operation of the vessel etc^iv. This being the case, the time limit for Contracts for Carriage would depend on the other contractual provisions, if any, or the applicable law governing time limits for contractual claims generally^v.
5. Conclusion:
   1. A Contract of Carriage and Contract for Carriage are similar but have a subtle difference in that the Contract for Carriage is wider and will have other provisions related to the operation of the vessel.
   2. The incorporation of a Clause Paramount in both the contract of carriage and the contract for carriage entitles the Owners to rely on the Hague or Hague-Visby Rules defences in respect of cargo.

^i. See definition of preposition and which can be viewed at https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/preposition
ⁱⁱ. To know more about Contracts of Affreightment, see post of HandyBulk.
ⁱⁱⁱ.Clause 31 A of NYPE 1993 states “ This bill of lading shall have effect subject to the provisions of the Carriage of goods by Sea Act of the United States, the Hague Rules, or the Hague-Visby Rules, as applicable, or such other similar national legislation as may mandatorily apply by virtue of origin or destination of the bills of lading, which shall be deemed to be incorporated herein and nothing herein contained shall be deemed a surrender by the carrier of any of its rights or immunities or an increase of any of its responsibilities or liabilities under said applicable Act. If any term of this bill of lading be repugnant to said applicable Act to any extent, such term shall be void to that extent, but no further.”
^iv. See also an article recently published by North Standard which has similar conclusions.
^v.The time bar under English Law for property damages is the Limitation Act 1980 and which provides for 6 years.