Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Jason clause

Read a random definition: pattern similarity

A quick definition of Jason clause:

A Jason clause is a rule in maritime law that requires all parties involved in a commercial voyage to contribute towards a loss sustained by some of the parties for the benefit of all, even if the loss was caused by the carrier's negligence. This clause is named after a Supreme Court case that upheld its enforceability. General average is a type of loss resulting from an intentional partial sacrifice of ship or cargo to avoid total loss, and the liability is shared by all parties who had an interest in the voyage. On the other hand, particular average is a loss resulting from an accidental partial loss or damage, and the liability is borne solely by the person who suffered the loss.

A more thorough explanation:

The Jason Clause is a term used in maritime law. It refers to a clause in a bill-of-lading that requires contribution in general average, even if the peril that caused the sacrifice was due to the carrier's negligence. This means that all parties involved in a commercial voyage, whether for vessel or cargo, must contribute towards a loss sustained by some of the parties for the benefit of all, even if the carrier is otherwise exempt from liability by statute.

The clause is named after the Supreme Court case that upheld its enforceability, The Jason, which was decided in 1912.

For example, if a ship carrying cargo encounters a peril that threatens the entire voyage, the captain may decide to intentionally sacrifice some of the cargo to avoid total loss. In this case, the loss becomes "general," meaning that it is spread ratably among all the parties involved in the maritime adventure, including the cargo owners and the carrier. The Jason Clause would require the carrier to contribute towards the loss, even if the peril was caused by their negligence.

Another example would be if a carrier fails to properly secure the cargo, causing it to shift and damage other cargo during the voyage. If the damaged cargo must be sacrificed to avoid total loss, the Jason Clause would require the carrier to contribute towards the loss, even though their negligence caused the peril.

Janus-faced | JCP

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
Vandy gettin fat, that's what bandi did
Dont agree dkk but out of messages so this is a talk for another day
17:34
@LawIsForPeasants: I just want you to know that: you matter, you are important, and finally, I am proud of you. :D
That is so fucking cringe and leave me alone
llama i appreciate you
17:35
@LawIsForPeasants: while charlie kirk's facts do not care about your feelings, just know that I do!
texaslawhopefully
17:36
@Dkk: Fair enough, but if you're using political philosophy to defend Trump, it's hard to reconcile him as a candidate with very relevant classic political theory, like Locke's individual rights and limited government as illustrated in the 2nd treatise, or the constitutional framework limiting executive power (e.g., Federalist 51). Trump's disregard for constitutional checks and populist rhetoric directly is in tension with our very foundational principles.
Dkk
17:36
@SplitterusClitterus: sounds good. Trying to paint a wine glass rn anyway after I just woke up.
Dkk
17:37
@texaslawhopefully: Psssh I would not use gender relations as a way to defend Trump. He does not go that route and I think literally him and everyone in their cabinet has no idea what those are. I mean, just look at how many divorces Elon and Trump have had.
texaslawhopefully
17:38
Was that not why you said you voted for him?
17:38
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: can I ask what “2 years retroactive withdrawals” means
17:39
elon and trump realize there are many fish in the sea, and sometimes u can't just 'make it work'
@sadpadresfan: grades changed to W for two consecutive years of classes
Dkk
17:39
Nah, I did not vote. I have never voted in my life because I have a lot of issues with it. 4 years ago my mom filled out my ballot for me because she wanted to but I do not vote.
17:40
based fellow non voter
@llama i do not need or desire external validation.
17:40
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: ah I see
17:41
@LawIsForPeasants: ok, sorry, I will not bother u while u 'self validate yourself in the corner' my bad.
@llama: im self validating so hard rn
17:42
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: thats very ithica of you, wasp.
texaslawhopefully
17:44
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: Out of curiosity, since you're in law school and prolly know fedsoc people, how conservative do you think you have to be to be in fedsoc? Like is a david french sort of conservative fairly common in it, or is it the maga type people mainly
i dont interact with any fedsoc people, but i dont know any maga people at cornell. but the student body overwhelmingly leans left, so i think they might not be comfortable showing that theyre conservative if that makes sense?
one time a guy kind of crashed out about masks in conlaw
but that's the most ive seen
texaslawhopefully
17:47
Yeah, that does make sense. I would like to join fedsoc, but I'm also, clearly, very opposed to Trump and where the GOP has gone.
if you join fedsoc and go for clerking and eventually become a judge. you will be pinholed into maga politics as long as maga is the predominant conservative stance
Idk if @irishdinosaur is online but congrats on UCLA!!
next you will say you want to be the first black kkk grand wizard
@SaddestPortlander: tysm!!!!
texaslawhopefully
18:00
yes congrats irishdinosaur! that's incredible
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.