ADMIRALTY-VALIDITY OF "BORN-TO-BLAME" CLAUSE IN BILL OF LADING

Authors

Richard B. Barnett S.Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Petitioner is owner of the S.S. Nathaniel Bacon which collided with the Esso Belgium damaging both ships. The cargo of the Bacon, owned by respondents, was also damaged. The collision was caused by the negligent navigation of employees of both ships. The bill of lading issued to respondents contained a "both-to-blame" clause requiring the cargo owners to indemnify the carrier for any cargo loss indirectly borne by the carrier. This action was brought to determine liability for the damages suffered in the collision. Held, on appeal, the ''both-to-blame" clause is invalid because of public policy prohibiting carriers from stipulating against their own negligence, and hence the cargo loss must be borne by the carrier as well as the ship with which it collides. United States v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co., 343 U.S. 236, 72 S.Ct. 666 (1952).

Recommended Citation

Richard B. Barnett S.Ed., ADMIRALTY-VALIDITY OF "BORN-TO-BLAME" CLAUSE IN BILL OF LADING, 51 Mich. L. Rev. 430 (1953).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol51/iss3/8