선하증권 중의 재판관할조항의 효력에 관한 연구 -미국의 판례,학설을 중심으로-

Jurisdiction clause is one of the most important terms and conditions normally found on the reverse side of a bill of lading. Many bills of lading stipulate the forum for litigation arising out of claims as well as the applicable law. Although the bill of lading and its terms and conditions constitute evidence of affreightment, wherever USCOGSA applies or other national law, the courts will carefully scrutinize the bill of lading to determine whether it exceeds the limits imposed by applicable statutory law or by the statutory law mandated to apply to bills of lading and carriage of goods. USCOGSA is applicable ex proprio vigore to “all contracts for carriage of goods by sea to or from ports of the United States in foreign trade.” USCOGSA is also applicable to contracts of carriage of goods between U.S. ports if the parties expressly so stipulate in the bill of lading. When USCOGSA applies by force of law, any conflicting clauses of the bill of lading is invalid. Despite this, the Supreme Court, in the case of Sky Reefer, held that a foreign forum selection clause is not invalid under USCOGSA. Since the Sky Reefer case, forum selection clauses in bills of lading have been consistently upheld. However there is no opportunity for a U.S. court to review a foreign decision, enforcement of a clause mandating a foreign forum may be denied. The purpose of this study aims to analyse trends of the jurisdiction clause under bills of lading with the American other cases as well as the Sky Reefer.