IL DIRITTO MRITTIMO

LUCA BOGGIO – La C.M.R. in Cassazione: errare umanum est
MANUELA BREGANTE – La competenza territoriale nelle controversie di lavoro della gente di mare: l’art. 603 cod. nav. e “il luogo di cessazione del rapporto di lavoro”
MONICA BRIGNARDELLO – Ancora sulle tariffe a forcella
ALBERTA FRONDONI – In tema di tutela dell’utilizzatore nel leasing finan-ziario
CARLO GOLDA – Prestazioni previdenziali totalmente private: un futuro contrasto tra normativa e giurisprudenza
CATERINA MONTEBELLO – Nuove opere in prossimità del demanio marittimo, istanza di nulla-osta in sanatoria e silenzio-assenso
MARCO OLIVI – Il regime giuridico delle opere realizzate dal concessionario sul demanio marittimo
CLAUDIO PERRELLA – Natura ed inquadramento dell’azione nei confronti dell’actual carrier in una recente decisione della Corte di Giustizia
LUCA RUGGIERO – Specialità del lavoro nautico, applicabilità del diritto straniero e limiti d’ordine pubblico internazionale
DANIELE TODDE – Lo spedizioniere ha diritto al rimborso delle spese sostenute per la causa intentatagli dal vettore da lui garantito?

INTERPRETATION OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS

AUSTRALIA
Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427)
SCOTLAND
Landcatch Ltd. v. International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund – Landcatch Ltd. v. Braer Corporation and Others – The “Braer” (Outer House of the Court of Session, 11 November 1997, 1999 Dir. Mar. 931)

THE 1924 BILL OF LADING CONVENTION AND ITS 1968 AND 1979 PROTOCOLS (HAGUE-VISBY RULES)

HISTORY OF THE CONVENTION

AUSTRALIA
Great China Metal Industries Co. Limited v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427)

OBLIGATION TO MAKE THE SHIP SEAWORTHY

AUSTRALIA
Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427)

OBLIGATION TO PROPERLY CARE FOR THE GOODS

AUSTRALIA
Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427)

EXCEPTED PERILS – PERILS OF THE SEA

AUSTRALIA
Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427)

LOSS OF RIGHT TO LIMIT

FRANCE
Groupement d’intérêt economique Scadoa and Others v. Société de Navigation et Transports–The “Woemann Bannière” (Cour de Cassation 4 January 2000, not yet reported)
UNITED STATES
Doris Cristina Piamba Cortes v. American Airlines Inc. (Court ofAppeals, Eleventh Circuit, 15 June 1999, 1999 AMC 2286)

TIME FOR SUIT

ITALY
Court of Cassation 24 February 1999, F.lli Ferri S.p.A. v. Adriatica di Navigazione (2000 Dir. Mar. 239)
THE 1952 ARREST CONVENTION

MARITIME CLAIM

ENGLAND
The “Edinburgh Castle” (Queen’s Bench Division (Admiralty Court) 19 March 1999, [1999] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 362; 2000 Dir. Mar. 266)
FRANCE
Tribunal de Commerce of Antibes 27 November 1998, Whiteseas v. Ecclestone-The “Turquoise” (1999 DMF 917, at p. 921)

ARREST IN RESPECT OF CLAIMS OTHER THAN MARITIME CLAIMS

ITALY
Court of Appeal of Genoa 12 February 2000, Morsviazsputnik Satellite Communications and Navigational Electronic Aids v. Azov Shipping Company-The “Yuriy Dvuzhilny” (not yet reported)

SCOPE OF APPLICATION

ITALY
Court of Appeal of Genoa 12 February 2000, Morsviazsputnik Satellite Communications and Navigational Electronic Aids v. Azov Shipping Company-The “Yuriy Dvuzhilny” (not yet reported)

THE 1976 LIMITATION CONVENTION (LLMC)

HISTORY OF THE CONVENTION

ENGLAND
The Owners of the Ship “Herceg Novi” and the Owners of the Ship “Ming Galaxy” (Court of Appeal 16 July 1998, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 454)

PRESENT LEVEL OF UNIFICATION

ENGLAND
The Owners of the Ship “Herceg Novi” and the Owners of the Ship “Ming Galaxy” (Court of Appeal 16 July 1998, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 454)









			DOTTRINA FRANCESCO BERLINGIERI – LUIGI ROVELLI – La nuova Convenzione sul sequestro di navi ANGELO BOGLIONE – “Non disclosure” e “misrepresentation” in assicurazione e riassicurazione ROSARIO ESPINOSA CALABUIG – La regulación de los contratos inter-na-cionales de transporte marítimo de mercancías en el Convenio de Roma de 1980 NOTE E OSSERVAZIONI A SENTENZA LUCA BOGGIO – La C.M.R. in Cassazione: errare umanum est MANUELA BREGANTE – La competenza territoriale nelle controversie di lavoro della gente di mare: l’art. 603 cod. nav. e “il luogo di cessazione del rapporto di lavoro” MONICA BRIGNARDELLO – Ancora sulle tariffe a forcella ALBERTA FRONDONI – In tema di tutela dell’utilizzatore nel leasing finan-ziario CARLO GOLDA – Prestazioni previdenziali totalmente private: un futuro contrasto tra normativa e giurisprudenza CATERINA MONTEBELLO – Nuove opere in prossimità del demanio marittimo, istanza di nulla-osta in sanatoria e silenzio-assenso MARCO OLIVI – Il regime giuridico delle opere realizzate dal concessionario sul demanio marittimo CLAUDIO PERRELLA – Natura ed inquadramento dell’azione nei confronti dell’actual carrier in una recente decisione della Corte di Giustizia LUCA RUGGIERO – Specialità del lavoro nautico, applicabilità del diritto straniero e limiti d’ordine pubblico internazionale DANIELE TODDE – Lo spedizioniere ha diritto al rimborso delle spese sostenute per la causa intentatagli dal vettore da lui garantito? JURISPRUDENCE ON MARITIME LAW CONVENTIONS INTERPRETATION OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS AUSTRALIA Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427) SCOTLAND Landcatch Ltd. v. International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund – Landcatch Ltd. v. Braer Corporation and Others – The “Braer” (Outer House of the Court of Session, 11 November 1997, 1999 Dir. Mar. 931) THE 1924 BILL OF LADING CONVENTION AND ITS 1968 AND 1979 PROTOCOLS (HAGUE-VISBY RULES) HISTORY OF THE CONVENTION AUSTRALIA Great China Metal Industries Co. Limited v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427) OBLIGATION TO MAKE THE SHIP SEAWORTHY AUSTRALIA Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427) OBLIGATION TO PROPERLY CARE FOR THE GOODS AUSTRALIA Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427) EXCEPTED PERILS – PERILS OF THE SEA AUSTRALIA Great China Metal Industries Co. Ltd. v. Malaysian International Shipping Corp.–The “Bunga Seroja” (High Court, 22 October 1998, 1999 AMC 427) LOSS OF RIGHT TO LIMIT FRANCE Groupement d’intérêt economique Scadoa and Others v. Société de Navigation et Transports–The “Woemann Bannière” (Cour de Cassation 4 January 2000, not yet reported) UNITED STATES Doris Cristina Piamba Cortes v. American Airlines Inc. (Court ofAppeals, Eleventh Circuit, 15 June 1999, 1999 AMC 2286) TIME FOR SUIT ITALY Court of Cassation 24 February 1999, F.lli Ferri S.p.A. v. Adriatica di Navigazione (2000 Dir. Mar. 239) THE 1952 ARREST CONVENTION MARITIME CLAIM ENGLAND The “Edinburgh Castle” (Queen’s Bench Division (Admiralty Court) 19 March 1999, [1999] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 362; 2000 Dir. Mar. 266) FRANCE Tribunal de Commerce of Antibes 27 November 1998, Whiteseas v. Ecclestone-The “Turquoise” (1999 DMF 917, at p. 921) ARREST IN RESPECT OF CLAIMS OTHER THAN MARITIME CLAIMS ITALY Court of Appeal of Genoa 12 February 2000, Morsviazsputnik Satellite Communications and Navigational Electronic Aids v. Azov Shipping Company-The “Yuriy Dvuzhilny” (not yet reported) SCOPE OF APPLICATION ITALY Court of Appeal of Genoa 12 February 2000, Morsviazsputnik Satellite Communications and Navigational Electronic Aids v. Azov Shipping Company-The “Yuriy Dvuzhilny” (not yet reported) THE 1976 LIMITATION CONVENTION (LLMC) HISTORY OF THE CONVENTION ENGLAND The Owners of the Ship “Herceg Novi” and the Owners of the Ship “Ming Galaxy” (Court of Appeal 16 July 1998, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 454) PRESENT LEVEL OF UNIFICATION ENGLAND The Owners of the Ship “Herceg Novi” and the Owners of the Ship “Ming Galaxy” (Court of Appeal 16 July 1998, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 454)