The shipping industry is the invisible vein of global trade and the blue link connecting continents across the world. Ocean-going giants cut through the vast blue waves, weaving the network of global trade—from the flow of bulk commodities to the symbiosis of industrial chains, every voyage carries the expectations of cross-regional cooperation.

Ports that operate non-stop day and night handle the supply and demand of the world, witnessing the iteration of business models and the reshaping of industrial patterns. Today, this blue territory embraces both opportunities of the times and multiple challenges: changes in geopolitical dynamics, adjustments to shipping route patterns, and the wave of low-carbon transformation are all driving the industry to evolve to a higher dimension.

Shipping is an ancient yet vibrant industry. It upholds its essence amid changes and forges ahead through storms. Above the deep blue, we catch a glimpse of the industry’s profound resilience and new vitality in the era, and witness the symbiotic relationship between trade and shipping.

Amidst the turbulent tides of global shipping, intertwined with the waves of cross-border trade and the game of geopolitical rules, the unique customs clearance and delivery system at Brazilian ports has made disputes over delivery of goods without original bill of lading (B/L) a "Sword of Damocles" hanging over shipping enterprises. When Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. (MSC), the world's largest international liner shipping company, became embroiled in a maritime cargo transportation contract dispute with Chinaland Solar Energy Co., Ltd., the Frank Cao legal team from AllBright Law Offices anchored themselves in professionalism and wielded rules as a sword. They forged ahead through judicial battles across multiple levels of courts, ultimately securing a complete victory to strengthen the legal barrier for shipping enterprises. Furthermore, they clarified the application criteria for the special prescription period under the Maritime Law through a landmark case.

The core dispute of the case centered on the dispute over the application of the special prescription system stipulated in the Maritime Law. Maritime transportation has long been characterized by industry-specific traits such as "long cycles, cross-border subjects, and unpredictable risks." The special prescription system established in the Maritime Law, inheriting the Hague-Visby Rules, is like a "rule compass" tailored for ocean voyages. Its fundamental difference from the subjective cognition standard in civil and commercial law lies in adhering to the objective criterion of "the goods arriving at the port of destination and being ready for delivery"—this is not only a key fulcrum for balancing the interests of carriers and shippers, but also the core cornerstone for maintaining the order of the shipping market. From the moment of intervention, the Frank Cao legal team accurately identified this point and established prescription defense as the core to break the deadlock.

During the first-instance proceedings, the Shanghai Maritime Court erroneously applied the subjective standard of civil and commercial law to the maritime dispute, determining the starting point of the prescription period as "two weeks after the goods were unlocked" as the date when the claim arose, plunging the case into a passive situation shrouded in "mist." "The essence of maritime disputes lies in the deep integration of industry logic and legal spirit, rather than the mechanical stacking of legal provisions," said the Frank Cao legal team. They then conducted in-depth research on the Minutes of the National Conference on Foreign-Related Commercial and Maritime Trials of the Supreme People's Court, typical cases, and judicial opinions. From legal spirit to domestic judicial practice, they constructed a complete legal logic chain emphasizing that "the special prescription period under the Maritime Law must follow the objective standard," accumulating strength for the subsequent reversal.

In the second-instance hearing, the Frank Cao legal team pointed out that the original intention of establishing the special prescription period under the Maritime Law is to address the industry pain points of "information asymmetry and uncontrollable risks" in maritime transportation. If a subjective cognition standard is adopted, it will inevitably lead to inconsistent starting points of prescription period varying from person to person and erratic judicial standards, ultimately shaking the stable foundation of the shipping market. Combining the operational practices at Brazilian ports, the team further argued that the objective fact of "the goods arriving at the port of destination and being ready for delivery" is the only choice that balances fairness and efficiency, much like installing "precision navigation" for cross-border shipping disputes. This argument hit the nail on the head and resonated with the judicial spirit established by the Supreme People's Court. The Shanghai Higher People's Court ultimately reversed the judgment by ruling, achieving a crucial turn-around that "dispelled the clouds and saw the sun."

Facing the retrial application filed by Chinaland Solar Energy Co., Ltd., the Frank Cao legal team once again elaborated on the landmark significance of the case from the perspectives of the unity of legal application and the stability of industry rules: if the subjective standard is allowed to erode the special prescription system under the Maritime Law, cases involving delivery of goods without B/L in Brazil will return to a chaotic state of "different judgments for similar cases," and the compliance expectations of shipping enterprises will be completely shattered. In August 2025, the Supreme People's Court issued a ruling dismissing the retrial application, drawing a satisfactory conclusion to this years-long legal battle. Moreover, it established a "rule lighthouse" for the industry through an effective judgment.

"The mission of maritime lawyers is not only to win a lawsuit for clients, but also to calibrate the course of rules for the industry," Frank Cao reflected when reviewing the case. "Maritime shipping is inherently a journey accompanied by risks, and legal rules are the ballast stone of the ship. The complete victory in this case is not only a precise practice of the special prescription system under the Maritime Law, but also builds a 'safety line' for shipping enterprises through judicial precedents, ensuring that every ocean voyage has clear rules to follow."

Amidst the turbulent tides of the global shipping industry, the Frank Cao legal team has demonstrated the strong capabilities of top maritime lawyers with their solid professional foundation, accurate strategic judgment, and tenacious professional spirit. This victory across three levels of courts not only helped MSC avoid huge losses, but also became a paradigm case for disputes over prescription periods in the maritime field. It provided clear guidance for courts at all levels to handle similar disputes and effectively unified judicial standards. In the future, the team will continue to deepen their expertise in the maritime field, weaving a legal protection network for global shipping with professionalism as threads and rules as shuttles. They will escort more enterprises on their "journey to the deep blue" and continuously demonstrate the professional strength and rule influence of Chinese lawyers in cross-border maritime disputes.

In 2001, China officially joined the WTO, accelerating the process of globalization, leading to a substantial growth in international trade and a sharp rise in shipping demand. This drove an unprecedented boom in the shipbuilding industry, marking the birth of the first super cycle. Seven years later, the global financial crisis swept across like a huge wave—banks recalled loans, shipowners were forced to abandon ships due to broken capital chains, and more than a decade of depression led to the bankruptcy of numerous shipyards. In 2020, driven by the combined effect of various factors, another new super shipbuilding cycle began to flourish...

“Global shipbuilding turns its focus to China, and China’s shipbuilding industry centers on Jiangsu. ‘Su Da Qiang’—a popular nickname for Jiangsu Province that speaks to its prowess—accounts for half of China’s shipbuilding sector. What it has weathered is not just one industry cycle after another, but also the trials of forging steel and enduring intense industrial challenges, along with a magnificent journey of striving for maritime strength,” said Lawyer He Haijun, who has witnessed and personally experienced the shipbuilding industry's decline from its peak to its trough and its subsequent return to prosperity since the 2008 financial crisis.

As the handling lawyer of China's first arbitration case involving backdated 80,000-ton bulk carrier construction contracts and PSPC fraud, Lawyer He went through multiple procedures including arbitration, application for revocation of the arbitration award, re-arbitration, and reapplication for revocation of the arbitration award. He helped the shipyard client win the final award, avoiding hundreds of millions of yuan in claims after the shipowner abandoned the ship. However, he still deeply felt the intense conflicts between commercial subjects during the economic downturn: "Interest balance is the true protection of clients' rights and interests. Win-win and multi-win are the ultimate missions of legal professionals. We are always legal ferrymen in the stormy waves."

Having been deeply engaged in the shipbuilding and financing fields for decades, following the national strategy and the development of new maritime productive forces, AllBright Law Offices has successively provided comprehensive and professional legal services for the manufacturing and financing of high-tech ships, offshore wind power platforms, and offshore engineering equipment for central state-owned enterprises and large-scale enterprises such as China State Shipbuilding Corporation, Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., COSCO Shipping Offshore, China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation, and Xiangyu Group. It has escorted their journey towards the deep blue and overseas expansion; it has also provided professional support for numerous listed companies, industry leaders, and financial leasing institutions to enter the deep sea and expand globally.

"Since the cancellation of national subsidies for offshore wind power in 2022, construction disputes involving offshore wind power platforms have entered a high-incidence period. Billions of money in construction projects are in a dilemma—continuing construction without a lease contract, or facing breach of contract if construction is suspended. We have unique experience in effectively resolving such disputes," He Haijun said. Due to the huge amount of disputes, neither party is willing to initiate arbitration or litigation easily. "Exchanging time for space, reselling, or finding new financiers are usually the suggestions we give to clients. Through designing rigorous transaction documents, all parties can feel safe and in control of risks. Although it does not bring high economic returns like litigation or arbitration, it conforms to the trend of diversified dispute resolution in the new era and sails towards a new channel for the high-quality development of the marine economy featuring harmony between humans and the sea."

Enveloped in the complex waves of cross-border trade, the global shipping industry often sees maritime disputes trapped in a "maze of rules" due to controversies over subject qualification, liability division, and exercise of rights. Recently, Lloyd's List Intelligence, a world-leading maritime data and intelligence agency, released the Chinese-English bilingual "China Maritime Law Review 2024." The case of Hapag-Lloyd (China) Co., Ltd. v. Shandong Awan Import and Export Co., Ltd. and Qingdao Lairun Cotton Textile Import and Export Co., Ltd. (Case No.: (2024) Lu 72 Min Chu No. 712), represented by Wang Zhonghua and Li Bin from AllBright Law Offices, was successfully included due to its clear judicial guidance and far-reaching industry value. It has become an important benchmark demonstrating the professional strength of AllBright's maritime legal services.

The dispute in this case directly targeted four core points of maritime cargo transportation contracts—subject qualification, liability attribution, exercise of right of lien, and limitation of action. After accepting the entrustment from Qingdao Lairun Cotton Textile Import and Export Co., Ltd., the legal team of Wang Zhonghua and Li Bin quickly penetrated the surface of the case and built a solid legal defense for the client with a "four-dimensional" defense system.

"The key to breaking through maritime disputes lies in accurately anchoring the connection point between legal rules and industry practices," the legal team clarified during their analysis. As a procedural right, the right to sue cannot be transferred independently of substantive rights; the plaintiff initiated the lawsuit merely by obtaining the authorization of the right to sue without acquiring substantive rights through means such as creditor's rights transfer. This clearly does not meet the prosecution requirement of "having a direct interest in the case" stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law, and its subject qualification is questionable in essence.

Focusing on liability division and the boundary of rights, the team further clarified: when the consignee fails to claim delivery of the goods or exercise other rights at the port of destination, the expenses and risks arising from the failure to take delivery of the goods should naturally be borne by the shipper as the contracting party to the transportation contract. This is an inevitable embodiment of the principle of equality between rights and obligations in the maritime field; in accordance with Article 87 of the Maritime Law, the exercise of the carrier's right of lien is subject to strict legal restrictions and can only be exercised against goods owned by the debtor, and its scope cannot be arbitrarily expanded; at the same time, the limitation of action for container demurrage fees is one year, starting from the day after the expiration of the free trial period. This special prescription rule is crucial for balancing the interests of all parties in the shipping industry and must be strictly observed.

During the trial, Wang Zhonghua and Li Bin dismantled the dispute focuses with solid legal expertise and supported their defense opinions with rigorous logical arguments, closely adhering to the spirit of legal provisions and aligning with maritime transportation industry practices. In the end, the court fully adopted the four agency opinions put forward by the team, legally dismissed the plaintiff's claim, and the plaintiff accepted the judgment without appealing. The first-instance judgment took effect, successfully resolving the litigation crisis for the client.

The cross-border and complex nature of maritime transportation determines that dispute resolution must balance procedural justice and substantive fairness. "The core significance of this case lies in clarifying four key boundaries for the industry through judicial practice—the criteria for determining subject qualification, the liability attribution for demurrage fees, the legal conditions for exercising the right of lien, and the starting point for calculating the limitation of action. This allows shipping enterprises to have clear rules to follow in transactions and clear expectations in disputes."Wang Zhonghua said when reviewing the case.

As a typical case included by a global authoritative institution, its benchmarking role is particularly prominent: it prevents unqualified subjects from abusing the right to sue and maintains judicial procedural justice; it regulates the transaction order of the shipping market and balances the rights and obligations of all parties; and it further promotes shipping enterprises to enhance their awareness of legal risk prevention.

Amidst the increasingly fierce game of rules in the global shipping industry, the legal team of Wang Zhonghua and Li Bin has used professionalism as a blade to accurately break through complex maritime disputes. They have not only safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of clients, but also demonstrated the professional depth and rule influence of Chinese maritime lawyers through typical cases. In the future, the team will continue to deepen their expertise in the maritime field, resolve industry disputes with exquisite skills, escort more enterprises on their "journey to the deep blue" with professional strength, and continuously inject solid legal momentum into the healthy development of the shipping industry.