SIMIC

OCEAN carriers are asking the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) not to weaponize rulemaking when liners find it necessary to refuse cargo, reports New York's Journal of Commerce.

The rulemaking, which centres on defining what it means for an ocean carrier to unreasonably refuse to deal or negotiate with respect to vessel space, has underscored sharp divisions in the industry on whether the FMC needs to take a heavier hand with liners following complaints by shippers.



This mostly concerns agricultural exporter incidents that occurred in the Covid crisis - that their bookings were being refused, costing millions of dollars in damages.



The FMC originally proposed a rule in September 2022, but with so much fuss, the agency reconsidered in June with a modified version and gave the industry 30 days to provide comment.



Maersk told the FMC that contract breaches go both ways as shippers often redirect cargo to other shipping options for lower rates and faster transits, noting that is "part of everyday business under US and international contract law."



The carrier added that those actions should be anticipated - especially since shippers agree to contracts that provide options if space is denied - and that disputes should be resolved by both parties, not the FMC since contract breaches are not violations of the US Shipping Act.



But the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) backed the FMC's suggestion to include a good faith clause on whether the ocean common carrier made a legitimate effort to mitigate the impact of a refusal.



"This is a critical addition to the rule since it incentivizes a carrier to have a contingency plan in place to respond to reasonably foreseeable events and make good faith efforts to help the impacted shipper move its goods to the ultimate destination as quickly and efficiently as possible," said RILA.