Maritime Law Editing and Proofreading Services

A cargo claim can turn on three words printed in the corner of a bill of lading. "Said to contain" is not a hedge or a formality; it is a phrase the statute recognizes, and whether it appears determines who bears the consequence of a container that does not hold what the paperwork says. Maritime documents are full of expressions like this, worn smooth by two centuries of use, that look like boilerplate and are not. Knowing which words are load-bearing is most of the skill, and the risk in editing this material is doing too much rather than too little.

Charterparties and fixture recaps make up most of the maritime work that reaches us. Bills of lading and sea waybills arrive with them, along with letters of indemnity, notices of readiness and laytime statements, protest and casualty reports, salvage and towage agreements, marine insurance documents and survey reports, and in rem pleadings.

The qualifying phrases on a bill of lading are worth setting out exactly, because they are so often reproduced from memory. A carrier is not liable for nonreceipt or misdescription where the goods are loaded by the shipper and the bill "is qualified by 'contents or condition of contents of packages unknown', 'said to contain', 'shipper's weight, load, and count', or words of the same meaning."¹ Words of the same meaning leaves room, and it is not room an editor should be exploring on the client's behalf. We do not paraphrase these, tidy them, or make them consistent with each other. Where the same bill carries two of them saying different things, or where a phrase has been shortened over successive versions of a form, we set out what we found and leave the choice where it belongs. The underlying liability is real: a carrier issuing a bill is liable for damages caused by nonreceipt of the goods "or by failure of the goods to correspond with the description contained in the bill."²

Description of the cargo carries a second consequence that is purely a matter of what the document says. Neither carrier nor ship becomes liable beyond "$500 per package lawful money of the United States, or in case of goods not shipped in packages, per customary freight unit", unless the nature and value of the goods "have been declared by the shipper before shipment and inserted in the bill of lading."³ Per package is a phrase doing enormous work, and how the cargo is described on the face of the bill is what a court will read to decide what a package was. A description that says one thing in the goods column and another in the marks and numbers is not a formatting inconsistency in this context.

Pleadings in admiralty have their own standard, and it is a writing standard. In an action in rem the complaint must "describe with reasonable particularity the property that is the subject of the action."⁴ More generally, it must state the circumstances from which the claim arises with enough particularity that the other side can, "without moving for a more definite statement, ... commence an investigation of the facts and ... frame a responsive pleading."⁵ That last clause is an unusually clear test and one an editor can genuinely apply: read the pleading as the other side, and ask whether it says enough to start looking. Where it does not, the gap is usually a date, a location, a voyage number, or a name that the drafter knows and has not written down.

Then there is the matter of who is reading. A charterparty may be agreed between an owner in Athens and a charterer in Singapore, performed by a crew whose first language is neither party's, and argued over in a third jurisdiction years later. English is the working language and it is a second language for many of the people relying on it. That does not mean simplifying the trade terms, which are precise and should stay. It means the sentences around them should admit only one reading: one obligation per sentence, an actor named in every one, and time expressed in a way that does not depend on where the reader is standing.

Incorporation clauses remain the most reliable source of trouble in the field. A bill of lading that incorporates "the charterparty" without saying which charterparty, or which of its terms, has created a question that will be answered by somebody else. Recap telexes have a related problem in miniature: drafted in shorthand under time pressure, binding, and read three years later by a tribunal to whom the abbreviations are not obvious. We flag both, and we expand nothing without being asked.

We do not interpret. Which terms govern, whether a clause is incorporated, whether a notice was valid, and how a phrase will be construed are questions for counsel and the parties, and they reach us settled. We do not alter trade terms, standard-form wording, or a figure. Where two documents in the same file disagree, both come back with the difference set out.

Everything sent to us is confidential, including casualty material, unconcluded fixtures, and commercial terms that are not public.

References

Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, 49 U.S.C. 80113(b), Liability for nonreceipt, misdescription, and improper loading. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/80113 ↩
Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, 49 U.S.C. 80113(a), Liability for nonreceipt, misdescription, and improper loading. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/80113 ↩
Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, section 4(5), reproduced in the notes to 46 U.S.C. 30701. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/46/30701 ↩
Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims, Rule C(2), In Rem Actions: Special Provisions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_c ↩
Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims, Rule E(2)(a), Actions in Rem and Quasi in Rem: General Provisions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_e ↩

A worked example: Statement of Claim in a Cargo Action

Admiralty, complaint in rem and in personam for cargo damage

Admiralty pleading has an unusually concrete standard. An in rem complaint must describe the property with reasonable particularity, and the complaint must state the circumstances of the claim particularly enough that the other side can begin investigating without moving for a more definite statement. That is a test an editor can apply directly: read the pleading as the defendant and ask whether it says enough to start looking. The draft below does not. It names no vessel, no voyage, no dates, no port, and no quantity, although every one of those sits in the file, and it describes the cargo in terms that cannot support a package limitation argument either way. Every fact in the revision comes from the file record reproduced in both panels. The two points that turn on the wording printed on the bill are queried, not settled.

Before

SPECIMEN, PREPARED BY EDITFAST FOR ILLUSTRATION. NOT A REAL PLEADING.
Corrand Foods LLC v. M/V Astrid Vale, in rem, and Northvane Shipping Ltd., in personam (all fictitious).

EXTRACT FROM THE FILE RECORD (reproduced unchanged in both panels)
FR-1 The vessel is the M/V Astrid Vale, IMO 9482217, Liberian flag, voyage 26-14.
FR-2 The cargo was 640 cartons of canned seafood, stowed in four 40-foot refrigerated containers, container numbers listed at Exhibit 2.
FR-3 Loaded at Guayaquil on 2 May 2026. Discharged at Port Everglades on 21 May 2026.
FR-4 On discharge, two of the four containers showed reefer temperatures above the carriage instruction of minus 18 degrees Celsius. The other two were within instruction.
FR-5 The surveyor's report of 23 May 2026 records 312 cartons damaged, all from those two containers.
FR-6 The bill of lading is numbered NVS-GYE-4471 and carries the phrase "shipper's weight, load, and count".
FR-7 No declaration of the nature and value of the goods was made before shipment or inserted in the bill.
FR-8 Claimed loss is $214,600, computed at Exhibit 4.
FR-9 The vessel is expected at Port Everglades again in October 2026.
FR-10 Counsel has not settled how to plead around the "shipper's weight, load, and count" notation. The editor is not asked to advise.
FR-11 Counsel has not settled whether to plead that each carton, or each container, is a package. The editor is not asked to advise.

COMPLAINT

1. This is an admiralty and maritime claim within the meaning of Rule 9(h).
2. Plaintiff is the owner of a cargo of foodstuffs which was shipped aboard the defendant vessel.
3. Defendant vessel is a merchant ship engaged in the carriage of goods for hire and is or will be within this district during the pendency of this action.
4. The cargo was delivered to the carrier in good order and condition but was discharged in a damaged condition as a result of the carrier's failure to properly and carefully carry, keep and care for the same.
5. By reason of the foregoing Plaintiff has sustained damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

After

SPECIMEN, PREPARED BY EDITFAST FOR ILLUSTRATION. NOT A REAL PLEADING.
Corrand Foods LLC v. M/V Astrid Vale, in rem, and Northvane Shipping Ltd., in personam (all fictitious).

COMPLAINT

1. This is an admiralty and maritime claim within the meaning of Rule 9(h).
2. The vessel proceeded against in rem is the M/V Astrid Vale, IMO 9482217, a merchant vessel under the flag of Liberia. The vessel is expected within this district in October 2026.
3. Plaintiff Corrand Foods LLC was at all material times the owner of the cargo described below and the lawful holder of bill of lading NVS-GYE-4471.
4. The cargo was 640 cartons of canned seafood, stowed in four 40-foot refrigerated containers. The container numbers appear at Exhibit 2.
5. The cargo was loaded aboard the vessel at Guayaquil, Ecuador on 2 May 2026 for carriage on voyage 26-14 to Port Everglades, Florida, where it was discharged on 21 May 2026.
6. The carriage instruction for the cargo was minus 18 degrees Celsius.
7. On discharge, the reefer units on two of the four containers recorded temperatures above minus 18 degrees Celsius. The remaining two containers recorded temperatures within instruction.
8. A survey conducted on 23 May 2026 found 312 cartons damaged. All 312 came from the two containers identified in paragraph 7.
9. The cargo was delivered to the carrier in good order and condition and was not discharged in the same condition.
10. Plaintiff's loss is $214,600, computed as set out at Exhibit 4.

[Two points for counsel before filing.
1. FR-6 records that the bill carries "shipper's weight, load, and count", and FR-10 records that how to plead around it is your decision. Paragraph 9 above pleads delivery in good order without addressing the notation. Tell us how you want that paragraph framed.
2. FR-11 records that whether to plead the carton or the container as the package is unsettled, and FR-7 records that no declaration of nature and value was made. Paragraph 4 states both the carton count and the container count and characterizes neither. It will need to be revised once you decide.]

What changed, and why

Was	Now	Reason
Defendant vessel is a merchant ship	The vessel proceeded against in rem is the M/V Astrid Vale, IMO 9482217, a merchant vessel under the flag of Liberia.	An in rem complaint must describe the property with reasonable particularity, and the draft named no vessel at all. FR-1 gives the name, the IMO number and the flag, which together identify one ship in the world.
is or will be within this district during the pendency of this action	The vessel is expected within this district in October 2026.	FR-9 gives the expected month. The formula asserts the jurisdictional fact without stating the basis for it, and the basis was in the file.
Plaintiff is the owner of a cargo of foodstuffs	Plaintiff Corrand Foods LLC was at all material times the owner of the cargo described below and the lawful holder of bill of lading NVS-GYE-4471.	FR-6 gives the bill number. Holding the bill is the basis for suing on it and the draft never mentioned the document the claim arises from.
a cargo of foodstuffs	640 cartons of canned seafood, stowed in four 40-foot refrigerated containers. The container numbers appear at Exhibit 2.	FR-2 gives the quantity, the packing and the exhibit. Foodstuffs is not a description a defendant can investigate from.
(no dates, ports or voyage)	loaded at Guayaquil, Ecuador on 2 May 2026 for carriage on voyage 26-14 to Port Everglades, Florida, where it was discharged on 21 May 2026	FR-1 and FR-3 give the voyage number, both ports and both dates. The test is whether the other side can begin investigating without asking for more; without a voyage or a date there is nothing to look up.
as a result of the carrier's failure to properly and carefully carry, keep and care for the same	The carriage instruction for the cargo was minus 18 degrees Celsius. On discharge, the reefer units on two of the four containers recorded temperatures above minus 18 degrees Celsius.	FR-4 gives the instruction and what the units recorded. The draft asserted the legal conclusion and omitted the facts supporting it, which is the reverse of what a pleading does.
(damage unquantified)	A survey conducted on 23 May 2026 found 312 cartons damaged. All 312 came from the two containers identified in paragraph 7.	FR-5 gives the survey date, the count and the link to the two warm containers. That link is the causal core of the claim and appeared nowhere in the draft.
(containers within instruction not mentioned)	The remaining two containers recorded temperatures within instruction.	FR-4 records it, and it is the fact that ties the damage to temperature rather than to the cargo itself. Pleading only the adverse half of a comparison wastes the stronger point.
damages in an amount to be proven at trial	Plaintiff's loss is $214,600, computed as set out at Exhibit 4.	FR-8 gives the figure and the computation. To be proven at trial is appropriate where the number is unknown and is a missed opportunity where it is in the file with its workings attached.
(bill notation and package unit unaddressed)	[Two points for counsel before filing ...]	FR-10 and FR-11 record both as unsettled. Each is a pleading decision with real consequences for the claim, and neither is an editorial one.

Specimen prepared by EditFast for illustration only. Not a real document, record or filing. Any resemblance to an actual organization, person or record is unintended. Not legal, regulatory, clinical or professional advice.

Key Maritime Law vocabulary

Charterparty: the contract for the use of a vessel. Usually a printed standard form with typed amendments, and where the two conflict the typed words normally prevail, which is why editing the printed part is not a small act.
Voyage charter: hire of a vessel for a specific voyage, with the owner paying the running costs. Laytime and demurrage belong to this form.
Time charter: hire of a vessel for a period, with the charterer directing employment and paying for fuel. Off-hire clauses belong to this form.
Bareboat charter: hire of the vessel alone, with the charterer crewing and operating it. The closest thing to a lease of the ship itself.
Fixture recap: the short message confirming the agreed terms of a charter. Drafted in shorthand under time pressure and fully binding, then read years later by people to whom the abbreviations mean nothing.
Bill of lading: receipt for the cargo, evidence of the contract of carriage, and document of title, all at once. Its three functions pull in different directions when it is drafted carelessly.
Sea waybill: a receipt and contract of carriage that is not a document of title. Cargo is released to the named consignee without production of the document.
Clean bill: a bill carrying no notation that the goods or packaging were damaged when received.
Claused bill: a bill carrying such a notation. The difference is commercially enormous, which is why letters of indemnity exist.
Said to contain: one of the phrases that qualifies a carrier's description of goods it did not load or count. The statute names it, along with "shipper's weight, load, and count" and "contents or condition of contents of packages unknown", so it is wording to reproduce exactly rather than paraphrase.
Package: the unit by which carrier liability is capped where no value has been declared. Whether a carton, a pallet or a container is the package can decide a case, and the answer is read off how the cargo is described on the bill.
Declared value: the nature and value of goods stated by the shipper before shipment and written into the bill, which displaces the standard package limitation.
Letter of indemnity: a promise to indemnify the carrier for acting against the strict terms of the bill, most often for issuing a clean bill or releasing cargo without one.
Notice of readiness: the notice that the vessel has arrived and is ready to load or discharge. It starts the laytime clock, so its wording and its timing are both contested regularly.
Laytime: the time allowed for loading and discharging under a voyage charter.
Demurrage: what the charterer pays when laytime is exceeded. Calculated from the laytime statement, so an arithmetic slip there is a money error.
Despatch: the reverse, paid by the owner when loading or discharge finishes early.
Deadfreight: what the charterer pays for cargo space booked and not used.
Off-hire: a period during which hire stops running under a time charter, typically for breakdown or detention. The clause defines the trigger, and drafting looseness here is expensive.
Seaworthiness: the vessel's fitness for the voyage, including crew, equipment and cargo spaces. Owed as a duty of due diligence rather than as a guarantee under the usual regimes.
Deviation: departure from the contractual route. Unreasonable deviation can cost the carrier its defenses.
General average: the principle that a loss deliberately incurred for the common safety is shared among ship and cargo interests in proportion to value.
Salvage: reward for voluntarily saving property at sea from peril. Governed by its own agreements and arbitration practice.
Towage: the contract for pulling or pushing a vessel. Its liability allocations differ sharply from carriage and should not be edited toward each other.
Lien on cargo: the carrier's right to hold cargo as security for freight, demurrage or other sums. Its scope comes from the contract, so the clause wording is what matters.
Arrest of a vessel: seizing the ship itself as security for a maritime claim. Brought in rem, which is why the complaint must describe the vessel with particularity.
In rem: an action against the vessel or other property rather than against a person. The complaint must be verified and must say the property is or will be within the district.
Protection and indemnity club: the mutual association insuring an owner's third-party liabilities, including cargo claims and pollution.
Hull and machinery insurance: cover for physical damage to the ship itself, distinct from the liability cover a club provides.
Limitation of liability: the shipowner's statutory right to cap liability for certain claims. Procedurally distinct from the package limitation on a bill of lading, and the two are often conflated in drafting.
Incorporation clause: the provision in a bill of lading pulling in terms from a charterparty. The oldest recurring source of trouble in the field, because it so often fails to say which charterparty or which terms.

Maritime Law Word Challenge

Even seasoned pros miss these — give it a shot.

Get a Free Estimate

« More Legal editing | All editing services