No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Netherlands Judicial Decisions on Private International Law
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1980
References
1. Viz., for the Bienville-cargo; for the Summit-cargo the time-limit was extended by agreement.
2. Cf., Tetley, , Marine Cargo Claims (1978) p. 59Google Scholar: American courts deem it sufficient if the true party comes forward before judgment is delivered.
3. See the comment by W.E. Haak, WPNR, no. 5288 pp. 865–866.
4. A similar opinion may be deduced from A.-G. Kist's Conclusion (NJ 1978 p. 1725, left, below), where he takes distance from the CA's judgment in this respect, stating with obvious reserve: “This interpretation (viz., of the Bill of Lading clause) rests for account of the CA …’
5. See Tetley, , op.cit., p. 59Google Scholar and Haak, , WPNR 1977, no. 5399.Google Scholar The Supreme Court's decision does not show whether any attention was paid to the comparative law issue.
6. Compare, for road-carriage, note B. Wachter (No. 3) at Supreme Court, 17 November 1978, NJ 1980, 484.