Vimar Seguros Y Reaseguros, S. A. v. M/V Sky Reefer
1995 U.S. LEXIS 4067, 515 U.S. 528, 132 L. Ed. 2d 462 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A foreign arbitration clause in a maritime bill of lading is not invalid under § 3(8) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) merely because it may increase the transaction costs of enforcing liability. COGSA's prohibition on 'lessening liability' refers to diminishing the carrier's substantive legal obligations, not altering the procedural forum for dispute resolution.
Facts:
- Bacchus Associates (Bacchus), a New York fruit distributor, contracted with Galaxie Negoce, S.A., a Moroccan supplier, to purchase a shipload of oranges and lemons.
- Bacchus chartered the M/V Sky Reefer, owned by M. H. Marítima, S.A. and time-chartered to Nichiro Gyogyo Kaisha, Ltd. (Nichiro), to transport the fruit from Morocco to Massachusetts.
- Nichiro, as the carrier, issued a standard form bill of lading to Galaxie as shipper and consignee.
- The bill of lading contained a clause requiring any dispute to be referred to arbitration in Tokyo, Japan, and to be governed by Japanese law.
- Galaxie tendered the bill of lading to Bacchus as part of the sale.
- Upon the ship's arrival in Massachusetts, Bacchus discovered that thousands of boxes of oranges had shifted and been damaged, resulting in a loss of over $1 million.
- Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros (Vimar Seguros), Bacchus's marine cargo insurer, paid a portion of the loss and became subrogated to Bacchus's rights against the carrier.
Procedural Posture:
- Vimar Seguros and Bacchus sued M. H. Marítima and the M/V Sky Reefer in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
- The defendants (respondents) moved to stay the action and compel arbitration in Tokyo, Japan, under the terms of the bill of lading and § 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).
- The District Court, a court of first instance, granted the defendants' motion to stay the action and compel arbitration.
- At the plaintiffs' request, the District Court certified its ruling for an interlocutory appeal.
- The plaintiffs (appellants) appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, an intermediate appellate court.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's order, holding that even if the clause violated COGSA, it was enforceable because the FAA took precedence.
- The plaintiffs (petitioners) petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, the highest court, which granted certiorari to resolve a circuit split.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a foreign arbitration clause in a maritime bill of lading governed by the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) violate § 3(8) of that Act, which prohibits clauses that 'lessen' the carrier's liability?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Kennedy
No, a foreign arbitration clause in a maritime bill of lading governed by COGSA does not violate § 3(8) of the Act. COGSA’s prohibition on clauses that 'lessen' liability addresses the carrier's substantive duties and obligations, not the procedural mechanisms for enforcing them. Section 3(8) invalidates clauses that relieve the carrier from liability for negligence or fault, but it does not prevent parties from agreeing to resolve disputes in a specific forum. The increased transaction costs and inconvenience of a foreign forum do not, in themselves, constitute a 'lessening' of substantive liability. Furthermore, any concern that foreign arbitrators will not apply COGSA is premature, as a U.S. court retains jurisdiction to review the arbitral award at the enforcement stage to ensure it does not violate U.S. public policy or statutory rights.
Dissenting - Justice Stevens
Yes, a foreign arbitration clause in a bill of lading does lessen the carrier's liability in violation of COGSA. From a practical standpoint, forcing an American plaintiff to pursue a claim in a distant foreign forum imposes prohibitive costs that effectively immunize the carrier from liability, particularly for smaller claims. The majority's narrow reading of 'lessening such liability' ignores the historical context of COGSA, which was enacted to correct the inequality of bargaining power between shippers and carriers. This decision unwisely discards decades of settled precedent, beginning with Indussa Corp. v. S. S. Ranborg, which correctly held that such clauses put a 'high hurdle' in the way of enforcing liability.
Concurring - Justice O'Connor
No, this specific foreign arbitration clause is not invalid at this stage. I agree that the increased cost of litigation in a distant forum, without more, does not lessen liability under COGSA § 3(8), and that petitioner's challenge based on the choice-of-law clause is premature. However, the majority goes too far in rejecting the reasoning and conclusion of the Indussa rule itself. A critical distinction exists between a foreign forum selection clause, which divests a domestic court of jurisdiction, and a foreign arbitration clause, under which a domestic court retains jurisdiction to review the award. The court should not have disturbed the unbroken line of authority invalidating foreign forum selection clauses, as that issue was not necessary to decide this case.
Analysis:
This decision represents a significant departure from decades of maritime law precedent that had invalidated foreign forum and arbitration clauses under COGSA. By overturning the Indussa rule, the Court prioritized the enforcement of arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and principles of international comity over the protective aims of COGSA. The ruling shifts the legal landscape by making it significantly more difficult for cargo owners to challenge foreign arbitration clauses at the outset. Instead of invalidating such clauses based on inconvenience, the burden is now on the cargo owner to demonstrate at the award-enforcement stage that the foreign proceeding prospectively waived or diminished their substantive statutory rights.
