针对索赔申请扣船程序能否中断《海牙-维斯比规则》中的诉讼时效？如何理解《海牙-维斯比规则》第I条(c)款中“根据运输合同载明装于甲板”的要求？提单中需对甲板货作出何种程度的标注和识别？就这些问题，此前仲裁庭和英国高院给出了裁判，然而近期发布的上诉法院判决推翻了一审高院的关于甲板货部分的判决（同时维持部分判决），使得对甲板货这类问题的判例又出现了转变。
详细信息请参阅附件。
Does arrest for security interrupt the time bar, and how should deck cargo be marked in bills of lading – [2026] EWCA Civ 1158
Can an application to arrest a vessel for security interrupt the time bar under the Hague-Visby Rules? How should the requirement in Article I(c) of the Hague-Visby Rules that cargo be “stated as being carried on deck and is so carried.” be understood? To what extent must deck cargo be marked and identified in a bill of lading? On these questions, an LMAA tribunal and the English High Court had previously handed down decisions. However, a recently issued Court of Appeal judgment ([2026] EWCA Civ 1158) has overturned the High Court’s ruling on the deck cargo issue (while upholding part of the first-instance decision), marking another shift in the case law on deck cargo matters.
Please see attached file for details.
