Compagnie des Messageries Maritimes v Wilson

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales concerning a dispute over a bill of lading. The plaintiff, Mr. Wilson, had sued the shipping company, Compagnie des Messageries Maritimes, in New South Wales for short delivery of goods shipped from Dunkirk to Sydney. The shipping company sought to stay the action, relying on a clause in the bill of lading that stipulated all legal actions arising from its interpretation or performance were to be determined by specified French courts.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the clause in the bill of lading, which designated French courts as the exclusive forum for dispute resolution, was rendered illegal and void by section 9(2) of the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act 1924 (Cth). This provision states that any stipulation or agreement purporting to oust or lessen the jurisdiction of Australian courts in respect of bills of lading for goods imported into Australia is illegal, null, and void. The court also considered whether, even if the clause was not entirely void, it could still form the basis for a stay of proceedings under the Arbitration Act 1902 (NSW).

The High Court, affirming the decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, held that the clause in the bill of lading was indeed void under section 9(2) of the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act 1924. The Court reasoned that the purpose of section 9(2) was to prevent contractual provisions from diminishing the jurisdiction of Australian courts in matters of sea carriage into Australia. The clause in question, by requiring disputes to be litigated exclusively in France, clearly purported to oust the jurisdiction of Australian courts. The Court found that this provision was not severable and that its invalidity under the Commonwealth Act left no basis for the shipping company's application to stay the proceedings in New South Wales.