Differences Between the Hague Rules, the Visby Rules, and the Hamburg Rules

From the Hague Rules to the Hamburg Rules, the international conventions on bills of lading have undergone a qualitative change in their liability regimes, providing more reasonable protection for the interests of the parties involved and responding to changes in shipping technology. The Rotterdam Rules, adopted in 2008, represent the latest round of attempts, but have not yet entered into force due to an insufficient number of ratifying countries. Using a comparison table plus item-by-item explanations, this article sorts out the differences among the four sets of rules and which set China applies.

An Overview of Four Sets of International Maritime Conventions

Data note: The wording of the various conventions and protocols differs by version; the above limits and periods shall be governed by the original texts of the conventions and the texts currently in force; which set of rules applies depends on the terms of the bill of lading and the governing law applicable to the case.

I. Basis of the Carrier's Liability

When the Hague Rules came into being, shipowners were powerful and shipping technology was limited, so it was impossible to impose very strict requirements on carriers; therefore, the “incomplete fault principle” was adopted. The Visby Rules made no amendment to this. The Hamburg Rules, however, changed it to the “presumed complete fault principle.”

The so-called fault principle means that one is liable if at fault and not liable if not at fault, and the civil law of most countries is based on this. The Hague Rules generally require the carrier to be liable for its own fault, but at the same time provide that the carrier may be exempted from liability for “the act, neglect, or default of the master, crew, pilot, or servants of the carrier in the navigation or management of the ship”—this is also the provision of the Hague Rules that has attracted the most criticism. Since one may be exempted from liability even if at fault, the Hague Rules are considered to adopt the incomplete fault principle.

The position of the Hamburg Rules is much stricter: not only does it determine whether the carrier is liable based on whether fault exists, but it also places the burden of proof on the carrier, namely, “unless the carrier proves that it itself, its servants or agents have taken all measures that could reasonably be required to avoid the occurrence and its consequences, the carrier shall be liable to compensate for the loss resulting from loss of or damage to the goods or from delay in delivery.” The carrier's liability is therefore significantly increased.

II. Maximum Compensation Limit

From the Hague Rules to the Hamburg Rules, the maximum compensation amount per unit of goods increased progressively:

• Hague Rules: not exceeding 100 pounds sterling per package or unit, or the equivalent in another currency.
• Visby Rules: raised to 10,000 gold francs per package or unit, or 30 gold francs per kilogram of gross weight, whichever is higher; and specified that one gold franc is a unit containing 66.5 milligrams of gold of 900/1000 fineness.
• Hamburg Rules: raised to 835 Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) per package or freight unit, or 2.5 SDRs per kilogram, whichever is higher.

The method of calculation also became increasingly reasonable. The Hague Rules calculated on a per-package or per-unit basis; with the development of unitized transport such as pallets and containers, the drawbacks of this method gradually became apparent. The Visby Rules provide: when goods are carried in containers, pallets or similar articles of transport, if the bill of lading states the number of packages or pieces of goods contained in such article of transport, compensation shall be made separately for each individual package or piece; if the specific number of packages or pieces is not stated, the entire container or pallet shall be treated as one package for compensation.

III. Definition of Goods

The Hague Rules provide a relatively narrow definition of goods, excluding live animals and deck cargo. The Hamburg Rules broaden the definition: they not only include live animals and deck cargo within the category of goods, but also cover articles of transport or packaging such as containers and pallets—where goods are consolidated in a container, pallet or similar article of transport, or where goods are packed and the article of transport or packaging is supplied by the shipper, such article or packaging shall also be included in “goods”.

IV. Scope of Application of the Convention

The Hague Rules apply only to bills of lading issued by Contracting States. Where the parties have not agreed otherwise in advance, for different goods carried by the same shipping company on the same route, situations may arise in which the Hague Rules apply to some but not to others. The Hamburg Rules avoid this deficiency: they not only provide that the Convention applies to all contracts of carriage by sea between two different Contracting States, but also provide that it applies as long as any one of the following five places is within a Contracting State: the defendant's place of domicile, the place where the bill of lading is issued, the port of loading, the port of discharge, and the place designated in the contract of carriage.

V. Carrier's Period of Responsibility

The period of responsibility stipulated in the Hague Rules is “from the time when the goods are loaded on to the time when they are discharged from the ship,” commonly referred to as “tackle to tackle.” The Hamburg Rules, by contrast, expand it to the period from when the carrier or its agent takes the goods in charge from the shipper or its agent until the carrier delivers the goods to the consignee or its agent, covering the entire period of custody at the port of loading, during carriage, at the port of discharge, and in container yards or freight stations, referred to as “port to port.” The Rotterdam Rules further extend the period to the land carriage segments before and after maritime transport, forming a “door-to-door” structure.

VI. Limitation of Actions

The time bar under the Hague Rules is one year, after which “in any event the carrier and the ship shall be discharged from all liability in respect of loss or damage.” For parties to ocean carriage, especially insurers that need to go through complex claim and settlement procedures before seeking recovery from the carrier, one year is clearly too short. The Visby Rules provide that the limitation period may be extended by agreement of the parties, and that after the one-year period has expired, a claim may be brought against a third party within the period permitted by the law of the court seized, but within three months, thus partially alleviating the problem of the limitation period being too short. The Hamburg Rules directly extend the limitation period to two years, while retaining the 90-day limitation period for recourse claims under the Visby Rules.

VII. Liability for Delay in Delivery

The Hague-Visby Rules contain no provisions on delay in delivery. The Hamburg Rules, however, provide that if the goods are not delivered at the port of discharge specified in the contract of carriage within the time expressly agreed upon, or, in the absence of such agreement, within the time that could reasonably be required of a diligent carrier after taking into account the actual circumstances, this constitutes delay in delivery, and the carrier shall be liable for compensation. The scope of compensation includes market loss, interest loss, and loss from stoppage of work and production. The amount of compensation shall be at most 2.5 times the freight payable for the delayed goods and shall not exceed the total freight payable under the contract.

The Rotterdam Rules: Positioning and Current Status

The full name of the “Rotterdam Rules” is the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea. It was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 11, 2008, and opened for signature in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, on September 23, 2009, hence the abbreviated name “Rotterdam Rules.” It brings sea carriage and the preceding and subsequent land carriage segments into a unified contractual framework and makes special provisions for electronic transport records.

The convention enters into force only one year after 20 instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession have been deposited. As of recent years, there have been about 25 signatory States, but only a few States have actually ratified or acceded to it, far short of the threshold for entry into force; therefore, it has not yet entered into force. Most major maritime States have not ratified it, and the prospects for its entry into force in the short term remain unclear. In practice, it serves more as a reference: for example, China’s Maritime Code, revised in 2025, drew on relevant international legislative experience in rules such as electronic transport records.

Which Set of Rules Applies in China?

China has not acceded to any of the above international maritime transport conventions, but has instead established its own system through domestic legislation. The Maritime Code of the People's Republic of China has been in force since July 1, 1993. Its chapter on the carriage of goods by sea drew heavily on the liability regime of the Hague–Visby Rules, including the basis of the carrier's liability, exemptions, the limitation of liability per package or unit, and the one-year limitation period for suit. Therefore, bills of lading issued at Chinese ports are generally governed by the Maritime Code rather than by a convention; where the bill of lading terms stipulate the application of a certain convention, the matter is then reviewed in accordance with that stipulation.

It should be noted that the law was revised and adopted on October 28, 2025, and will take effect on May 1, 2026. This is the first comprehensive overhaul since its promulgation, with 16 chapters and 310 articles, among which special provisions on electronic transport records have been newly added. When citing provisions, please rely on the article numbers in the currently effective text.

Further reading

• CSC International Convention for Safe Containers: Certification Regime and Amendment History
• Complete Process and Required Documents for Cargo Damage Claims
• Allocation of Liability in Container Transport: Liability Boundaries Between Carrier and Shipper
• How to Remedy a Lost Bill of Lading?
• What Is an Ocean Bill of Lading? Detailed Explanation of Its Core Functions
• Use of Ocean Bills of Lading: Issuance, Circulation, and Loss Handling
• What Are Shipping Conference Container Rules?

Frequently Asked Questions

Which international convention applies to export bills of lading from China?

China has not acceded to the Hague Rules, the Visby Rules, or the Hamburg Rules. Therefore, bills of lading issued at Chinese ports are generally governed by the Maritime Code of the People's Republic of China, whose liability regime is mainly modeled on the Hague-Visby Rules. If the terms of the bill of lading separately provide for the application of a particular convention, that agreement governs.

Have the Rotterdam Rules entered into force? Can they be cited directly?

They have not yet entered into force. The Convention requires that at least 20 instruments of ratification have been deposited and one year has elapsed before it enters into force. Currently, far fewer countries have ratified or acceded to it, and its near-term prospects for entry into force are uncertain. In practice, it should not be cited directly as the governing law, but its ideas regarding electronic transport records, the door-to-door period of responsibility, and other matters have gradually been absorbed into the domestic legislation of various countries.

To check documentary requirements, release methods or bill of lading terms for a specific route, submit an enquiry online and the Bofeng Logistics team will assess it against your actual cargo and trade lane.

This article was prepared by the Bofeng Logistics team and reviewed in October 2026. Trade practices, convention texts and platform rules change over time; refer to carrier booking confirmations, bill of lading terms and current authority regulations for specifics.