Draft or review a maritime arbitration clause for an Australian cargo dispute
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- Produce a first-draft London, Singapore or ACICA clause from the playbook, compare LMAA, SCMA and ACICA rules, and note New York Convention enforcement in Australia.
- What the lawyer must review
- Apply Carmichael Rail [2024] HCA 4 to any London clause challenged under COGSA Art III r 8
- Check whether the cargo interest can show the clause lessens liability; if not, it survives
- Check the operative document and any incorporation from the charterparty
- Check the contested reach of COGSA s 11
- Consider ACICA or MLAANZ arbitration
- Written for / version
- Commonwealth versionCth
Rules that apply
The document starts from the task name. Change it if this piece of work is different.
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording and identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Review operative clauses in the complete document, including definitions, cross-references, schedules and inconsistencies with the instructions.
- Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.