Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to review the doctrine of privity of contracts under common law and to analyze some issues of Himalaya Clause cases under carriage of goods by sea in United States. Design/Methodology/Approach - This paper studies scopes, application, and requirements of the Himalaya Clause by analyzing cases in the United States, such as Robert C. Herd & Co., Inc., v. Krawill Machinery Corp., 359 U.S. 297 (1959), and Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. James N. Kirby, Pty. Ltd., 125 S.Ct. 385 (2004). Findings - This paper confirms that contracts for the carriage of goods by sea must be construed like any other contracts: by their terms and consistent with the intent of the parties. Also, the paper finds that an independent contractor such as a stevedore, a terminal operator, an inland carrier, and a railroad, could be the beneficiary of a valid Himalaya Clause by analyzing U.S. courts cases. Research Implications - This paper sheds light on some legal issues surrounding the Himalaya Clause by comparative review. Also, it offers practical implications and suggestions that revise some articles of the Korean Commercial Code for the extended application of the Himalaya Clause.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
