英国1992年海上货物运输法

合集下载

海运单和提单的区别

海运单和提单的区别

海运单与提单的区别海运单(SeaWaybill),又称海上运送单或海上货运单,它是"承运人向托运人或其代理人表明货物已收妥待装的单据,是一种不可转让的单据,即不须以在目的港揭示该单据作为收货条件,不须持单据寄到,船主或其代理人可凭收货人收到的货到通知或其身份证明而向其交货"(引自1978年9月联合国欧洲经济委员会《Recommendation》)海运单与提单的区别和联系1、提单是货物收据、运输合同、也是物权凭证,海运单只具有货物收据和运输同这两种性质,它不是物权凭证。

2、提单可以是指示抬头形式,通地背书流通转让:海运单是一种非流能性单据,海支单上标明了确定的收货人,不能转让流通。

3、海运单和提单都可以作成"已装船(Shippedonboard)形式,也可以是"收妥备运"(Receivedforshipment)形式。

海运单的正面积各栏目格式和缮制方法与海运单提单基本相同,只是海运单收货人栏不能做成指示性抬头应缮制确定的具体收货人。

4、提单的合法持有人和承运人凭提单提货和交货,海运单上的收货人并不出示海运单,仅凭提货通知或其身份证明提货,承运人凭收货人出示适当身份证明交付货物。

5、提单有全式和简式提单之分,而海运单是简式单证,背面不列详细货运条款但载有一条可援用海运提单背面内容的条款。

6、海运单和记名提单(StraightB/L),虽然都具名收货人,不作背书转让,但它们有着本质的不同,记名提单属于提单的一种,是物权凭证,持记名提单,收货人可以在提货却不能凭海运单提货。

使用海运单的好处海运单仅涉及托运人、承运人、收货人三方,程序简单,操作方便,有利于货物的转移。

首先,海运单是一种安全凭证,它不具有转让流通性,可避免单据遗失和伪造提单所产生的后果。

其次,提货便捷、及时、节省费用,收货人提货无须出示海运单,这既解决了近途海运货到而提单未到的常见问题,又避免了延期提货所产生的滞期费、仓储费等。

第一章 海商法概述

第一章  海商法概述

(二)海商法的法律特性
• 3. 法律关系复杂性
• (1)参与主体多元化
• (2)权利和义务内容复杂 • 如:贸易术语 CIF中,卖方既可以是运输合同的托运人
,也可以是保险合同的投保人。
海商法的价值理念 1. 实质公平——最典型的商法
2. 衡平原则——国家之间、海运各方 主体之间、海商制度之间
3. 保护海运业——海运业是高风险、
高投入的行业
自学章节
第四节 海商法的法律渊源
第五节 海商法的适用效力
所适用的习惯法的汇集,
其主要内容涉及船舶。 船长。船员。海难救助 以及船长出卖运送品之 权能等。在大西洋一带
影响广泛,为欧洲海商
法的发展奠定了基础。
二、近现代西方国家的海商法
法国海商法:路易十四1681年颁布《海事条例》, 是欧洲第一部综合性海商法典,内容涉及船员、船舶、 运输契约、海事司法、国家对海岸和港湾渔业的管理 等。1807年拿破仑把《海事条例》的私法部分纳入 《法国商法典》第二编“海商”部分。
海商法的萌芽
是法国大西洋海岸一带 商人海事法庭的判例和 康苏拉度原意为“裁 判官”,该法又称为 《海商裁判例》,它 收集了14世纪流行于 地中海沿岸的海事判 例、习惯和学说,内 容丰富,体系完整, 被称为当时最完备的 海事法,对以后的欧 洲航运界影响深远。 在瑞典哥特兰岛上的 维斯比城编纂并因此 得名。它主要继承了 奥列隆海法、阿姆斯 特丹法、波罗的海汉 萨城镇吕贝克法的传 统,盛行于波罗的海 沿岸及北海南岸,德 国、瑞典等波罗的海 沿岸国家海商法受其 影响较大。
德国海商法:立法体例照搬 了法国商法典的。1861年 《德国商法典》第五编
英国的海商法:14世纪《海事黑皮书》、1734 年《船舶所有人责任法》、1855年《提单法》、 1894年《商船法》、1906年《海上保险法》、 1924年和1971年《海上货物运输法》

SEA WAYBILL是什么意思

SEA WAYBILL是什么意思

1、SEA WAYBILL是什么意思?意思是海运单海运单,是指证明海上货物运输合同和承运人接收货物或者已将货物装船的不可转让的单证。

海运单的正面内容与提单的基本一致,但是印有“不可转让”的字样。

有的海运单在背面订有货方定义条款、承运人责任、义务与免责条款、装货、卸货与交货条款、运费及其他费用条款、留置权条款、共同海损条款、双方有责碰撞条款、首要条款、法律适用条款等内容。

有的海运单没有背面条款,仅在海运单的正面或者背面载明参照何运输条件或者某种提单或其他文件中的规定。

海运单不能背书转让,收货人无需凭海运单,只需出示适当的身份证明,就可以提取货物。

因此海运单迟延到达、灭失、失窃等均不影响收货人提货,这样可以有效地防止海运欺诈、错误交货的发生。

海运单在无转卖货物意图的贸易运输中焕发了勃勃生机。

1990年在国际海事委员会第34届大会上通过了《国际海事委员会海运单统一规则》,供当事人选择适用。

有关海运单的法律问题主要有:1、海运单的法律适用。

海运单是海上货物运输合同的证明,因而调整海上货物运输合同的汉堡规则和有关国内法适用于海运单。

然而,调整提单法律问题的海牙规则、海牙-维斯比规则能否适用于海运单,目前观点不一。

2、收货人的法律地位。

海运单规则规定了代理原则,规定托运人不仅为其自身利益,同时也作为收货人的代理人,为收货人的利益订立运输合同。

因而收货人被视为海运单所证明的运输合同的当事人,可以依据海运单向承运人主张权利并承担义务。

3、货物支配权。

在使用海运单的情况下,托运人有权在承运人向收货人交付货物之前的任何时候书面变更收货人,实现对货物的支配。

补充:Waybill (Sea waybill) 运单(海运单)。

1992年英国海上货物运输法(the U.K. Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992)(U.K. 1992 c. 50)第1(3)条将海运单定义为:“海运单是指任何不是提单但是是:1、包含或证明了海上货物运输合同的货物收据;以及2、确定了承运人根据该海上货物运输合同应对其交付货物的人,的一份单据。

海上货物运输法中合同相对性原则突破的考量

海上货物运输法中合同相对性原则突破的考量

[收稿日期]2011-05-01[作者简介]陈本寒(1963-),男,安徽和县人,武汉大学法学院教授、博士生导师,主要从事物权法、担保法研究;程一航(1967-),男,广东汕头人,武汉大学法学院2006级博士研究生,广东卓信律师事务所律师。

“喜马拉雅条款”源自1953年英国“阿德勒诉狄克逊”一案。

事实上,早期的“喜马拉雅条款”是海运提单中的一个约定化的条款,在提单豁免承运人对货物的灭失、损坏责任的条款中扩大到第三方获益(特别是装卸工和港口经营人)或限制了其责任。

它在海商法中是对合同相对性原则突破的一个例外,并被海运实践普遍接受。

其后又被各国立法及有关海运国际公约吸收和接纳。

究其根源,“喜马拉雅条款”的理论已在早期的民法海商法管辖区就被民法所首先接受。

本文采用比较法研究方法全面系统地对英国法下突破合同的相对性原则及“喜马拉雅条款”产生和沿革进行剖析,结合生效的三大海运国际公约以及新的国际海运公约《鹿特丹规则》进行比较法研究,以期对我国合同相对性原则理论及《海商法》的实际承运人制度提供重要的参考。

一、英国海商法下认可合同的相对性原则合同相对性原则,又称合同相关性原则(privity of contract )指“订立契约系由双方当事人所为,因此契约中之权利义务等亦只涉及契约中双方当事人之间的问题,契约之内容及履行不涉及与双方当事人之间所订契约无关之第三人”[1]324。

该原则是英国合同法中一个核心的但又充满争议的原则,直到19世纪后期才得以在英国确立。

在此之前,虽然也有判例提出这些观点,比如说,根据权威的英国法律史著作所述,早在1668年,法院在Bourne v.Mason (1668)中就判决原告没有起诉权,因为他“并没有给自己带来任何麻烦或者给被告带来任何利益,因此,就合同的对价来说,他只是一个局外人(stranger )”。

但是,这一判决结果并没有作为一项法律规则得到普遍的遵循[2]208。

根据公认的看法,合同相对性原则最早是在Tweddle v.Atkinson 案件中提出来确立的。

电放提单和SEA WAY BILL有什么区别啊!

电放提单和SEA WAY BILL有什么区别啊!

Surrender B/L电放提单表示不用全套正本提单清关。

你只需要扫描或传真给客人电放提单的COPY件就可以了。

这种方式一般是提单寄送来不及的情况。

一般近洋航线,例如:韩国,日本等船期短的情况。

还有就是合作非常久,互相很信任的基础上。

电放提单,也是放货指令的一种操作形式!SURRENDER B/L一般是卖方收到买家的货款/或确信买家能付款的情况下,通知船公司出电放单给目的港代理,这样,客户就可以不凭提单提到货了,这样做比较有风险,但是如果是货款到帐了的话,是比较简便的操作模式。

一般情况下发货人通过银行交提单或将提单寄给收货人。

提单是货物所有权的凭证,因此收货人只有拿到正本提单后才可以提货。

但在近洋运输如从上海到日本或韩国时,由于船期很短,几天船就到了,但这时通过银行或邮寄提单可能还没到,这时为不影响收货,收货人会要求发货人将提单电传、传真或E-mail到发货人,发货人不需要正本提单,货物到港后收货人凭提单传真件就可以提货。

因此所谓电放就是凭电子的、电传的或传真件放行的意思。

提单电放在办理时,先与船公司联系,告诉提单需要电放。

这样船公司就可以通过电报让目的港的船公司机构凭传真件提货。

一般最好是在未出提单前办理,船公司不用出具正本提单;如果已经出具正本提单,则需要将正本提单交回船公司(如果是TO ORDER(横条加法人章背书)或者是船公司要求的话就必须背书(公章)),让船公司电放提单。

另外,船公司会要求发货人出具一份保函(船公司或货代有现成的格式)且盖shipper公章,保证电放造成的一切问题与其无关。

由于电放后发货人将不再掌握货权,因为办理电放前一定要确认发货人能够安全收款,否则极易造成钱货两空的局面。

现在比较流行SEA WAYBILL ,它是介于正本提单和电放提单之间的。

即有正本的作用,又享有电放的快捷。

同时,有一部分船公司,做电放是收费的,但是,申请WAYBILL是没费用的。

最保险的就是收到钱后做SEA WAYBILL本人现在是做外贸操作,出口西班牙马德里的货一般都是电放。

都是“FOB”惹的祸?

都是“FOB”惹的祸?

都是“FOB”惹的祸?--------天津周刚立一 现今出口流行曲:FOB最近这些年,尤其是在江浙和广东一带,当笔者以进出口公司名义初次向生产厂商寻购产品时,这些企业中不少业务人员脱口而出:FOB 美元多少。

听起来毫不犹豫,非常成熟。

却让我感到异常的茫然。

当我问到国内企业如何用美元结算,如何开增值税发票,退税如何处置?是否应包含相关出口费用的时候,回应的是沉默:无从回答。

当我说我愿意按FOB成交,但是厂家必须按照FOB规定承担应有的出口费用,风险和责任的时候,他们却质疑地强调:“我只负责把货送到港口”。

当然他们根本就不知道还有一个国际商会和它的出版物:《国际贸易术语解释通则》,中的FOB到底是和含义?那就更不用说《美国对外贸易定义1941》中的FOB了。

为什么会出现这种现象。

通过相关统计或报道中获悉,我国出口中按照FOB成交的合同已经占总量的70--90%。

具体哪个更准确,我看已经没有必要澄清了。

就是我们取偏下水平,70%已经很可观了。

问题是随着这种价格术语合同数量的增大,这种合同出现的问题——骗局,讹诈,付款失控和无单放货的数量也大增,当然这和比例有一定的关系,但是和FOB 价格合同的性质和我国出口商家对FOB价格合同和FOB价格术语的掌握程度就没有直接的连带关系吗?有人说我国出口采用FOB合同的现象,有它的“存在的合理性”和“存在的空间”。

这颇有点哲学的味道:存在的就是合理的。

它对吗?为什么我们进口正好相反呢?这不仅仅是价格条款也包括相应的支付条款的问题。

虽然我们戴着世界加工厂的高帽子,但是简单概括起来这种现象:一,总体缺乏竞争力,没有话语权。

二,自身素质的问题:极度缺乏国际贸易实务的知识和实践经验,从计算的角度来讲,FOB最简单。

不需要计算知识和技巧。

那么从其他角度来讲,FOB看似简单,很多人就把它当做国内贸易的工厂提货的概念,或把货送到港口指定地点就可以了,不知道国际贸易还有责任,费用和风险的概念,它们包括什么内容等等。

《海商法》下收货人提货权利义务之辨

《海商法》下收货人提货权利义务之辨

《海商法》下收货人提货权利义务之辨陈琳琳【摘要】《中华人民共和国海商法》(简称《海商法》)第86条将收货人在卸货港的提货行为绝对义务化,使得包括该条文以及第42条、第44条、第71条、第78条、第79条、第80条在内的法律条文间,存在着概念范围模糊、条文冲突的法律形式逻辑问题,也与《海商法》设置提单等制度的法律目的相背离.因此,在法律条文上进一步明确卸货港提货为收货人的权利,修正收货人提货权在《海商法》中的条文表达,将有助于提升《海商法》法律形式逻辑的严密性,并促进《海商法》立法目的和价值的实现.【期刊名称】《中国海商法研究》【年(卷),期】2018(029)003【总页数】5页(P11-15)【关键词】《海商法》;收货人;卸货港;提货权【作者】陈琳琳【作者单位】大连海事大学法学院,辽宁大连 116026【正文语种】中文【中图分类】DF961.9在国际货物买卖中,买方通常被要求承担及时提货的义务。

但在国际海上货物运输中,因涉及相关单证或权利的转让,收货人与承运人之间的关系扑朔迷离,收货人是否有权或有义务提取货物,往往取决于特殊的法律语境。

《中华人民共和国海商法》(简称《海商法》)第86条在条文表达上似乎体现的是将收货人的提货行为绝对义务化,即不管是卸货港无人提货亦或是收货人拒绝提货、迟延提货,收货人都需要向承运人承担由此产生的卸货港费用*《海商法》第86条规定:“在卸货港无人提取货物或者收货人迟延、拒绝提取货物的,船长可以将货物卸在仓库或者其他适当场所,由此产生的费用和风险由收货人承担。

”。

这与《海商法》第42条对收货人的定义以及涵摄于该法第44条、第71条、第78条、第79条、第80条等条文中的规范,存在法律形式逻辑上的冲突和对法律实质目的的背离问题。

一、《海商法》形式逻辑上收货人提货绝对义务的否定(一)收货人范围模糊对提货绝对义务的否定国际上对收货人的概念没有统一的规范。

英美法下提单持有人与收货人被视为两个不同的概念,主要适用于提单法而非海上货物运输法。

海上货物运输法的历史发展及其启示

海上货物运输法的历史发展及其启示

海上货物运输法的历史发展及其启示张文广• 2013-06-27 09:57:00 来源:《中国海商法研究》2013年第2期摘要:在过去的百年中,曾产生过若干个重要的海上货物运输立法,其中的经验与教训值得我们深思。

文章从海上货物运输法的历史沿革出发,对制约海运公约效力的因素加以详细剖析,总结海上货物运输法的基本特征,对《鹿特丹规则》的发展趋势做出了预测并提出我国的应对策略。

关键词:国际公约海上货物运输法鹿特丹规则启示当今的国际贸易中,80%以上的货物周转由海运完成。

作为一个全球性行业,海运需要一个统一的规则。

2008年12月11日,在经历了长达近十年的起草、磋商和谈判后,联合国大会通过了《联合国全程或部分海上国际货物运输合同公约》,2009年9月23日在荷兰鹿特丹举行了签署仪式,并将公约命名为《鹿特丹规则》。

截至2012年12月31日,在公约的24个签署国中,仅有西班牙和多哥两个国家批准了公约,距离满足公约的生效要件(20个批准国),尚有很长的路要走。

公约通过之后,国际社会再次掀起了一轮研究《鹿特丹规则》的高潮。

是否应当批准公约、公约何时生效及生效之后的国际影响力如何,成为各方关注的焦点。

在2009年公约签署前后,国际社会曾经比较乐观,认为《鹿特丹规则》很快就会生效。

然而,随着时间的推移,各方对公约的热情逐渐消退,质疑的声音也越来越大。

[①]历史总在重复发生。

公约的制定,本就是一个妥协和寻求共识的过程。

各方有不同意见,实属正常现象。

目前,公约已经通过,重新谈判的可能性微乎其微。

公约的前景,主要取决于各国尤其是航运大国和贸易大国的态度。

本文从历史的角度出发,分析海上货物运输法背后的各种因素,提出中国对待《鹿特丹规则》的态度。

一、《哈特法》《哈特法》(The Harter Act)的全称是《关于船舶航行、提单以及与财产运输有关的某些义务、职责和权利的法律》(An Act Relating to Navigation of Vessels, Bills of Lading, and to Certain Obligations, Duties, and Rights in Connection with the Carriage of Property)。

论提单持有人诉权的理论来源

论提单持有人诉权的理论来源

论提单持有人诉权的理论来源提单持有人的诉权是提单持有人依据提单享有的直接对承运人主张损失索赔的权利。

提单持有人是否取得对承运人主张索赔的权利,在实践中有着重要的意义。

在发生货物损失或者出现无单放货时,起诉承运人的一般是提单持有人,因为提单持有人受到了损失。

如果否认提单持有人对承运人直接主张诉讼的权利,他只有两个选择:1.要求托运人代为诉讼2.以受害人的身份提起诉讼。

第一种方法,由于托运人自己没有遭受损失因而不愿意为提单持有人代为诉讼卷入案件。

第二种方法,以侵权提起诉讼时,在中国法下侵权的举证责任要远远大于违约的举证责任。

我国《海商法》在制定过程中主要侧重于对实体权利的规定,而对诉权的程序性规定不够明确,导致实践中认识的不统一。

因此,对提单持有人诉权问题的研究是现实意义的,对其提出合理的建议可以保障《海商法》的顺利实施以及当事人的合法权益。

1.合同转让说。

合同转让是指在不改变合同关系的情况下,合同关系的一方当事人依法将其合同权利和义务全部或者部分地转让给第三方的法律行为①。

该学说认为,在提单转让的同时提单持有人取得了合同当事人的地位,享有提单的权利并承担提单中的义务,托运人就脱离了原来的运输合同。

在此情况下,能提出诉讼的只能是提单持有人,而不能是托运人。

《1885年英国提单法》和《1992年英国海上货物运输法》采用此种观点在赋予提单持有人依据提单对承运人享有诉权,同时也否认托运人在转让提单后的诉权。

此种观点值得商榷,理由如下:1.从实践来看,提单的转让并不需要得到承运人的同意。

《合同法》第88条规定,合同的转让必须得到对方当事人的同意,而在海事实践中提单转让是无须承运人同意的。

2.托运人将合同中的地位、权利和责任转让给提单持有人之后,为何还要承担原运输合同的责任。

3.承运人与提单持有人发生争执时,承运人为何不能以对托运人的抗辩对抗提单持有人。

4.提单法律关系的主体是提单持有人和承运人,而运输合同的主体是托运人和承运人,两者之间虽然密切联系但仍有较大的区别。

全文

全文

第二十章、1971年《海上货物运输法》translated by Thomas Guo郭国汀【关键词】国际航运、海上货物运输【全文】导论1971年《海上货物运输法》继续了最初由1924年《海上货物运输法》调整船东和提单当事人之间相互权利和义务的立法进程。

该立法的历史可以简明扼要地表述如下:普通法下的船东,无论他是根据租船合同还是依据提单运送货物,可以按其意愿随意地限定他作为承运人的初步责任,经年累月,在这些文件中的保护性除外条款在数量和复杂性两方面均大为增加,以致达到了此种程度:一份仔细而详尽的文件成为必要,以便确定船东拥有何种权利。

就租船合同而言,这未引起反对;责任的减少,使得船东能以更低的运费率运送货物,承租人有足够的机会来确定他的合同条款。

然而,对于提单出现了不同的考虑,它们不仅是运输合同,而且也是物权凭证(documents of title)由于商业习惯及1855年《提单法》提单得自由地在贸易中作为部分货币(as part of currency)流通,赋予他们的持有人权利和义务。

因此,收货人,银行及其他非原始合同当事人,以及不能有效地控制其条款的人们,变得与提单有关系,却没有真正的机会检查其条款,或估计它提供的担保价值,(value of security)在1914年至1918年战前及战后数年间,由于提单条款变得更为多种多样,标准化的需求变得日益迫切,立法对部分进出口强加的要求也日益增加,1893年美国的哈特法,规定了签发提单的海运承运人的某些最低限度的责任。

不过,有一派相反的观点主张,在准备定义承运人和货方的权利和义务的法律规则(code of rule)过程中,寻求对货方的不满(merchant’s grievances)进行救济。

这些救济可以按与1890年安特卫普共同海损规则同样的方式,用自愿的协议并入提单。

最后,赞成立法干预的争论占了上风,在1923年10月间,意图以国内立法为基础草拟公约的谈判和讨论达到了顶峰。

论议付行对提单项下货物权利

论议付行对提单项下货物权利

论议付行对提单项下货物的权利摘要:议付行对于提单项下的货物的权利主要取决于议付行对提单的权利以及提单本身代表的对货物的权利。

根据ucp600和实务中外贸公司的操作,议付行是买入提单,对提单拥有所有权;根据对英国1992年《海上货物运输法》的法条分析,提单对货物拥有的是合法的间接占有权。

议付行以提单持有人的身份要求承运人交付货物,取得对货物的直接占有之后,就可以对货物行使留置权,从而使债权优先于一般债权人获偿。

关键词:提单议付 ucp600 占有留置权一、引言跟单信用证贸易情况下,议付行因议付而持有提单,当议付行因为审单失误而遭开证行拒付,又因受益人破产而无法追索时,提单便成了议付行收回损失的唯一依据。

然而因为对议付行持有提单的性质以及提单本身的性质的诸多争议,使得议付行在根据提单行使权利时,也存在着诸多不确定和存在争议的地方。

本文拟从对议付行持有提单的性质和提单本身的性质两个问题做出解答,来说明议付行对提单项下货物的何种权利,并进一步分析议付行如何利用这一权利使得债权获得优先偿付。

二、议付行对提单拥有所有权对于这一问题,理论和实践中主要分为两派,有人认为议付行对提单拥有的是担保权[1],提单作为权利质权的凭证质押在议付行手中;其余的人认为议付行对提单拥有的是所有权,议付行买入了提单。

[2]这一问题的实质是信用证关系中,议付行为的性质是什么。

在ucp500时代,由于没有具体的规定,引起了很大的争议。

ucp600对议付下了明确的定义,ucp600第二条规定,议付意指被指定银行在其应获得偿付的银行日或在此之前,通过向受益人预付或者同意向受益人预付款项的方式购买相符提示项下的汇票及/或单据。

可见,议付行与受益人是单据买卖关系,议付行对提单具有所有权。

虽然买入提单不是议付所必须的,而提单的背书也可以分为质押背书和转让背书。

但是在实务中,卖方在将提单背书给议付行时,都是转让背书。

根据《海商法》第79条,提单的转让,依照下列规定执行: 1.记名提单: 不得转让;2.指示提单: 经过记名背书或者空白背书转让;3.不记名提单: 无需背书, 即可转让。

浅论我国 《海商法》中“提单持有人”的概念

浅论我国 《海商法》中“提单持有人”的概念

浅论我国《海商法》中“提单持有人”的概念摘要:“提单持有人”是海商法中基本的涉人概念之一,在某种意义上是连结海上货物运输法和国际货物买卖法这两大领域的枢纽。

然而,我国现行法律对此规定并不明确,相关条文之间亦存在逻辑矛盾。

本文试图运用比较分析和判例解读的方法,对我国《海商法》中的“提单持有人”的概念作一相对清晰的界定。

“任何一门科学成熟的标志,总是表现为将已经取得的理性知识的成果——概念、范畴、定律和原理系统化,构成一个科学的理论体系”,而“理性认识的发生和发展是一个形成概念范畴、并将概念范畴序列化、体系化的过程,同时也是理论和理论体系形成和发展的过程。

”笔者以为,对《中华人民共和国海商法》的修正工作同样需要从规范和统一其中的基本概念范畴做起。

以“提单持有人”这一概念为例,提单持有人/收货人作为提单债权关系中的两方当事人当无疑义,然而我国现行法律恰恰对何谓提单持有人并无明确界定,进一步而言,学界对于是否有必要设立“提单持有人”概念亦有争议。

本文通过比较研究国内外相关立法,结合近年国内的海商司法实践,试图对“提单持有人”的概念作出更加明确、合理的界定。

一、一、各国法律对各国法律对“提单持有人”概念概念的规定的规定1.美国法的规定关于提单持有人的概念,美国提单法适用于所有提单。

美国提单法42条(美国法典第80101条)规定,提单“持有人”指实际占有提单且享有其中财产权的人。

1根据美国统一商法典第1-201条第20款,“单证持有人”指占有物权凭证、票据或投资证券的人,且所占有的物权凭证、票据或投资证券必须系对占有人或系对其指定人签发,或系背书给该占有人或给其指定人,或系为凭票付款在(或交货)式或空白背书式。

而据该法第5款,“单证占有人”指占有凭票付款(或交货)或空白背书票据、物权凭证或证券的人。

学者解释,“单证持有人”,在可流通凭证,是指该凭证签发给他或凭其指示,而该人占有凭证;凭证签发给持有人,而该人占有凭证;凭证的记名被背书人占有凭证。

1992英国海上货物运输法-中文

1992英国海上货物运输法-中文

英国1992年海上货物运输法本法取代1855 年提单法,并就提单及某些其他航运单证做出新规定。

本法由上院贵族议员和下院议员于本次议会审议通过,并经女王陛下批准,兹经其授权颁布如下:第 1 条适用本法的有关航运单证(1)本法适用于下列单证:(a)任何提单;(b)任何海运单;以及(c)任何船舶交货单。

(2)本法所称提单:(a)不包括那些不能以背书方式予以转让的单证,也不包括不能以非背书转手方式予以转让的无记名单证,但(b)在符合上述情况的条件下,包括收货待运提单。

(3)本法所称海运单是指不是提单的任何单证,但它:(a)是一种包含或证明海上货物运输合同的货物收据,而且(b)载明了承运人根据该项运输合同向其交付货物的人。

(4)本法所称船舶交货单是指不能被称之为提单或海运单的任何单斑点,但是该单证应包含一项保证,该保证:(a)是按照或为了与这一单证有关的货物或其中部分货物的海上运输合同而做出的。

(b)是一项承运人向这一单证所载明的人交付该单证项下货物的保证。

(5)国务大臣可以制订规定使本法也适用于采用电传系统或任何其他信息技术进行交易的下述有关事项:(a)签发适用本法的单证;(b)上述单证的背书、转手或其他转让方式;或(c)为有关上述单证而做的任何其他事项。

(6)上述第(5)款所述的规定可以:(a)由国务大臣,就本法适用于该款所述事项,对本法本条以下的条款作出该大臣认为适当的修正。

(b)包括补充、附属性以及过渡性规定。

同时,该分款赋予的制订规定的权力应以成文法予以实施,除非该规定按上、下两院或其中之一的决议被宣布为无效。

第 2 条航运单证所赋予的权利(1)依照本条后述规定,成为下列之一者:(a)合法的提单持有人;(b)承运人按货物运输合同应将有关海运单项下的货物向其交付的人(该人不是货物运输合同的原缔约一方);(c)按照船舶交货单所包含的保证,应将与该交货单有关的货物向其交付的人;则应(由于其成为提单持有人,或根据具体情况,成为提取货物者)被视为已成为货物运输合同的缔约一方,从而被转让和赋予该合同项下的一切诉讼权利。

提单是运输合同吗

提单是运输合同吗

提单是运输合同吗篇一:从运输合同到提单债权邢海宝上传时间:2006-10-10从运输合同到提单债权邢海宝中国人民大学法学院副教授浏览次数:4119 字体大小:大中小提单在托运人和承运人之间不能被视为运输合同本身。

提单在第三人手中是运输合同的唯一证据,是债权凭证。

[1]关于提单持有人的权利来源,有各种学说。

我认为,理论上,受让提单的第三人,其权利和义务来源于其前手(例如托运人)的转让。

没有前手转让提单,第三人无论如何不能取得相应的权利和义务,第三人的权利义务就成了空穴来风。

而在法律上,依我国民法通则第91条、合同法第79条、第84条、第88条和海商法第79条,转让说有其根据。

提单为何从证明之一变成了唯一证明?对此也有几种学说。

我认为,对正当持有人的或善意支付对价而持有提单的第三人,应当坚持提单的无因性。

持有提单的第三人对承运人的直接权利,是基于持有提单的事实,要求承运人依据提单记载的条件交付特定货物。

1、如何判断海上货物运输合同已经发生转让?提单作为运输合同自然可以转让。

我国合同法规定了运输合同的转让规则。

如何判断海上货物运输合同已经发生转让?有论者认为,运输合同能否转让取决于第三人能否受让该合同,而收货人向承运人主张权利(请求提货货索赔损失)标志着转让人和受让人达成运输合同转让的合意,承运人则据此判断收货人已经受让运输合同。

另方面,运输合同的转让还需通知承运人、获得承运人同意。

而托运人向承运人订舱、填写订舱单的收货人一栏时,已经向承运人指明了货物交付的对象。

承运人接受订舱,表明其已经知道托运人将要向收货人转让提货权及相关义务。

因此,在海上货物运输合同订立时,托运人已经履行了运输合同提货权转让的通知义务。

而且,承运人也同意了托运人转移按照约定受领货物、协助承运人完成交付的义务。

笔者认为,通常情形,提单背书交付受让人后,运输合同即发生转让。

转让人与受让人转让运输合同的合意体现在买卖合同等协议或运输单据的背书交付当中。

英国海上运输法 1992年

英国海上运输法 1992年

Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted).Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 19921992 CHAPTER 50An Act to replace the Bills of Lading Act 1855 with new provision with respect to bills of lading and certain other shipping documents.[16th July 1992] Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—1Shipping documents etc. to which Act applies(1)This Act applies to the following documents, that is to say—(a)any bill of lading;(b)any sea waybill; and(c)any ship’s delivery order.(2)References in this Act to a bill of lading—(a)do not include references to a document which is incapable of transfer eitherby indorsement or, as a bearer bill, by delivery without indorsement; but(b)subject to that, do include references to a received for shipment bill of lading.(3)References in this Act to a sea waybill are references to any document which is not abill of lading but—(a)is such a receipt for goods as contains or evidences a contract for the carriageof goods by sea; and(b)identifies the person to whom delivery of the goods is to be made by the carrierin accordance with that contract.(4)References in this Act to a ship’s delivery order are references to any document whichis neither a bill of lading nor a sea waybill but contains an undertaking which—(a)is given under or for the purposes of a contract for the carriage by sea of thegoods to which the document relates, or of goods which include those goods;and2Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 (c. 50)Document Generated: 2011-03-19 Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted).(b)is an undertaking by the carrier to a person identified in the document to deliverthe goods to which the document relates to that person.(5)The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for the application of thisAct to cases where a telecommunication system or any other information technology is used for effecting transactions corresponding to—(a)the issue of a document to which this Act applies;(b)the indorsement, delivery or other transfer of such a document; or(c)the doing of anything else in relation to such a document.(6)Regulations under subsection (5) above may—(a)make such modifications of the following provisions of this Act as the Secretaryof State considers appropriate in connection with the application of this Act toany case mentioned in that subsection; and(b)contain supplemental, incidental, consequential and transitional provision;and the power to make regulations under that subsection shall be exercisable by statutory instrument subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.2Rights under shipping documents(1)Subject to the following provisions of this section, a person who becomes—(a)the lawful holder of a bill of lading;(b)the person who (without being an original party to the contract of carriage) isthe person to whom delivery of the goods to which a sea waybill relates is tobe made by the carrier in accordance with that contract; or(c)the person to whom delivery of the goods to which a ship’s delivery order relatesis to be made in accordance with the undertaking contained in the order, shall (by virtue of becoming the holder of the bill or, as the case may be, the person to whom delivery is to be made) have transferred to and vested in him all rights of suit under the contract of carriage as if he had been a party to that contract.(2)Where, when a person becomes the lawful holder of a bill of lading, possession of thebill no longer gives a right (as against the carrier) to possession of the goods to which the bill relates, that person shall not have any rights transferred to him by virtue of subsection (1) above unless he becomes the holder of the bill—(a)by virtue of a transaction effected in pursuance of any contractual or otherarrangements made before the time when such a right to possession ceased toattach to possession of the bill; or(b)as a result of the rejection to that person by another person of goods ordocuments delivered to the other person in pursuance of any such arrangements.(3)The rights vested in any person by virtue of the operation of subsection (1) above inrelation to a ship’s delivery order—(a)shall be so vested subject to the terms of the order; and(b)where the goods to which the order relates form a part only of the goods towhich the contract of carriage relates, shall be confined to rights in respect ofthe goods to which the order relates.(4)Where, in the case of any document to which this Act applies—Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 (c. 50) Document Generated: 2011-03-193Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted).(a) a person with any interest or right in or in relation to goods to which thedocument relates sustains loss or damage in consequence of a breach of thecontract of carriage; but(b)subsection (1) above operates in relation to that document so that rights of suitin respect of that breach are vested in another person,the other person shall be entitled to exercise those rights for the benefit of the person who sustained the loss or damage to the same extent as they could have been exercised if they had been vested in the person for whose benefit they are exercised.(5)Where rights are transferred by virtue of the operation of subsection (1) above in relationto any document, the transfer for which that subsection provides shall extinguish any entitlement to those rights which derives—(a)where that document is a bill of lading, from a person’s having been an originalparty to the contract of carriage; or(b)in the case of any document to which this Act applies, from the previousoperation of that subsection in relation to that document;but the operation of that subsection shall be without prejudice to any rights which derive from a person’s having been an original party to the contract contained in, or evidenced by, a sea waybill and, in relation to a ship’s delivery order, shall be without prejudice to any rights deriving otherwise than from the previous operation of that subsection in relation to that order.3Liabilities under shipping documents(1)Where subsection (1) of section 2 of this Act operates in relation to any documentto which this Act applies and the person in whom rights are vested by virtue of that subsection—(a)takes or demands delivery from the carrier of any of the goods to which thedocument relates;(b)makes a claim under the contract of carriage against the carrier in respect ofany of those goods; or(c)is a person who, at a time before those rights were vested in him, took ordemanded delivery from the carrier of any of those goods,that person shall (by virtue of taking or demanding delivery or making the claim or, ina case falling within paragraph (c) above, of having the rights vested in him) becomesubject to the same liabilities under that contract as if he had been a party to that contract.(2)Where the goods to which a ship’s delivery order relates form a part only of the goodsto which the contract of carriage relates, the liabilities to which any person is subject by virtue of the operation of this section in relation to that order shall exclude liabilities in respect of any goods to which the order does not relate.(3)This section, so far as it imposes liabilities under any contract on any person, shall bewithout prejudice to the liabilities under the contract of any person as an original party to the contract.4Representations in bills of ladingA bill of lading which—(a)represents goods to have been shipped on board a vessel or to have beenreceived for shipment on board a vessel; and4Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 (c. 50)Document Generated: 2011-03-19 Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted).(b)has been signed by the master of the vessel or by a person who was not themaster but had the express, implied or apparent authority of the carrier to signbills of lading,shall, in favour of a person who has become the lawful holder of the bill, be conclusive evidence against the carrier of the shipment of the goods or, as the case may be, of their receipt for shipment.5Interpretation etc(1)In this Act—“bill of lading”, “sea waybill” and “ship’s delivery order” shall be construedin accordance with section 1 above;“the contract of carriage”—(a)in relation to a bill of lading or sea waybill, means the contract containedin or evidenced by that bill or waybill; and(b)in relation to a ship’s delivery order, means the contract under or for thepurposes of which the undertaking contained in the order is given;“holder”, in relation to a bill of lading, shall be construed in accordance withsubsection (2) below;“information technology” includes any computer or other technology bymeans of which information or other matter may be recorded or communicatedwithout being reduced to documentary form; and“telecommunication system” has the same meaning as in theTelecommunications Act 1984.(2)References in this Act to the holder of a bill of lading are references to any of thefollowing persons, that is to say—(a) a person with possession of the bill who, by virtue of being the person identifiedin the bill, is the consignee of the goods to which the bill relates;(b) a person with possession of the bill as a result of the completion, by deliveryof the bill, of any indorsement of the bill or , in the case of a bearer bill, of anyother transfer of the bill;(c) a person with possession of the bill as a result of any transaction by virtue ofwhich he would have become a holder falling within paragraph (a) or (b) abovehad not the transaction been effected at a time when possession of the bill nolonger gave a right (as against the carrier) to possession of the goods to whichthe bill relates;and a person shall be regarded for the purposes of this Act as having become the lawful holder of a bill of lading wherever he has become the holder of the bill in good faith.(3)References in this Act to a person’s being identified in a document include referencesto his being identified by a description which allows for the identity of the person in question to be varied, in accordance with the terms of the document, after its issue; and the reference in section 1(3)(b) of this Act to a document’s identifying a person shall be construed accordingly.(4)Without prejudice to sections 2(2) and 4 above, nothing in this Act shall preclude itsoperation in relation to a case where the goods to which a document relates—(a)cease to exist after the issue of the document; or(b)cannot be identified (whether because they are mixed with other goods or forany other reason);Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 (c. 50) Document Generated: 2011-03-195Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted).and references in this Act to the goods to which a document relates shall be construed accordingly.(5)The preceding provisions of this Act shall have effect without prejudice to theapplication, in relation to any case, of the rules (the Hague-Visby Rules) which for the time being have the force of law by virtue of section 1 of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971.6Short title, repeal, commencement and extent(1)This Act may be cited as the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992.(2)The Bills of Lading Act 1855 is hereby repealed.(3)This Act shall come into force at the end of the period of two months beginning withthe day on which it is passed; but nothing in this Act shall have effect in relation to any document issued before the coming into force of this Act.(4)This Act extends to Northern Ireland.。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

英国1992年海上货物运输法本法取代1855年提单法,并就提单及某些其他航运单证做出新规定。

本法由上院贵族议员和下院议员于本次议会审议通过,并经女王陛下批准,兹经其授权颁布如下:第1条适用本法的有关航运单证(1)本法适用于下列单证:(a)任何提单;(b)任何海运单;以及(c)任何船舶交货单。

(2)本法所称提单:(a)不包括那些不能以背书方式予以转让的单证,也不包括不能以非背书转手方式予以转让的无记名单证,但(b)在符合上述情况的条件下,包括收货待运提单。

(3)本法所称海运单是指不是提单的任何单证,但它:(a)是一种包含或证明海上货物运输合同的货物收据,而且(b)载明了承运人根据该项运输合同向其交付货物的人。

(4)本法所称船舶交货单是指不能被称之为提单或海运单的任何单证,但是该单证应包含一项保证,该保证:(a)是按照或为了与这一单证有关的货物或其中部分货物的海上运输合同而做出的。

(b)是一项承运人向这一单证所载明的人交付该单证项下货物的保证。

(5)国务大臣可以制订规定使本法也适用于采用电传系统或任何其他信息技术进行交易的下述有关事项:(a)签发适用本法的单证;(b)上述单证的背书、转手或其他转让方式;或(c)为有关上述单证而做的任何其他事项。

(6)上述第(5)款所述的规定可以:(a)由国务大臣,就本法适用于该款所述事项,对本法本条以下的条款作出该大臣认为适当的修正。

(b)包括补充、附属性以及过渡性规定。

同时,该分款赋予的制订规定的权力应以成文法予以实施,除非该规定按上、下两院或其中之一的决议被宣布为无效。

第2条航运单证所赋予的权利(1)依照本条后述规定,成为下列之一者:(a)合法的提单持有人;(b)承运人按货物运输合同应将有关海运单项下的货物向其交付的人(该人不是货物运输合同的原缔约一方);(c)按照船舶交货单所包含的保证,应将与该交货单有关的货物向其交付的人;则应(由于其成为提单持有人,或根据具体情况,成为提取货物者)被视为已成为货物运输合同的缔约一方,从而被转让和赋予该合同项下的一切诉讼权利。

(2)一旦有人成为合法的提单持有人,而此时持有提单已不再授予持有人拥有与该提单有关货物(对承运人而言)的权利,该持有人则不能获得本条第(1)款规定的任何权利的转让,除非他因下列原因成为提单持有人:(a)有拥有货物的权利不再附属于对单证的占有之前,已按照合同或其他安排达成交易者;或(b)由于其他人拒绝按照任何此类安排从该提单人处接受货物或单证。

(3)按照本条第(1)款规定,就船舶交货单而赋予任何人的权利:(a)应是按照交货单条款内容而赋予的权利,和(b)当交货单项下的货物仅为运输合同项下货物的一部分时,应仅限于与交货单有关的货物的权利。

(4)对适用本法的任何单证,如:(a)与该单证项下货物具有利益或权利,或与之有关的人因违背货物运输合同致使其遭受损害,但(b)本条第(1)款已对该单证生效,从而有关上述违约的诉讼权利被转让他人,则,该他人有权为受害方的利益行使诉讼权利,但该权利的行使范围,应与倘若这此权利是由受害方为其利益自行行使时所享有的权限范围相一致。

(5)如权利之转让是因本条第(1)款对任何单证的生效而产生,则该项由该款所规定之转让将废除因下述事项而产生的权利:(a)如果提单,作为运输契约原缔约一方所具有的权利;(b)如是本法所适用的任何单证,基于第(1)款对有关单证的前手转让的的生效所产生的权利;但,该款的实施,就以海运单所包含或体现的合同而言,不得损及作为该合同原缔约一方所具有的任何权利;就船舶交货单而言,不得损及非由于第(1)款对该交货单先前生效所产生的任何权利。

第3条航运单证项下的责任:(1)当本法第2条第(1)款对本法所适用的任何单证生效时且按该款被赋予权利的任何人:(a)向承运人提取或要求提取任何该单证项下的货物时;(b)就任何此项货物向承运人按运输合同提出索赔时;或(c)在其被赋予这些权利之前,即是向承运人提取或要求提取任何此项货物的人时,则该(因其提货或要求提货或提起索赔,或在上述C段范围内,因其被赋予了权利)须象该合同原缔约人一样,承担该合同项下的同样责任。

(2)当船舶交货单项下货物仅是运输合同项下货物的一部分时,因本条对该交货单的生效而致任何人所承担的责任,将不包括任何不属于该货单项下的货物。

(3)本条一旦按其规定使任何人承担了任何合同项下之责任,均不得妨碍做为该合同项下原缔约方的任何人所承担的责任。

第4条提单的记载事项一份提单,当其(a)记载了已装船或已收妥待运的货物;并(c)业经船长签署,或虽经非船长但已由承运人以明示,默示或明显方式授权的人签署,则该提单,为保护合法提单持有人的利益,对承运人构成货已装船,或视具体情况,货已收妥待运的最终证据。

第5条定义与解释(1)在本法中,"提单"、"海运单"与"船舶交货单"就按上述第1条予以解释;"运输合同"(a)涉及提单和海运单时,是指该提单或海运单所包含或证明的合同;而(b)涉及船舶交货单时,是指一项合同,包含在交货单中的保证是按照或为了该合同而做出的。

"持有人",就提单而言,应按下述第(2)款予以解释;"信息技术"包括任何计算机或其他技术手段,通过这些手段,信息或其他事项可无需采用单证形式即可记录或传输。

"电子传输系统",具有与"1984年电讯法"所规定的相同含义。

(1984年第12号法令)(2)本法所称提单持有人是指下述任何人:(a)持有单证的人,因其名称在该单证中已予指明从而成为该单证项下货物的收货人;(b)通过递交单证的方式完成任何单证背书,或在无记名单证情况下以任何其它方式转让单证,;因而成为持有单证的人;(c)因进行任何交易致使其成为持有单证的人,但使之成为上述(a)或(b)段规定之持单人的此类任何交易不应是在下述时间达成,即:(对承运人而言)持有该单证已不再具有拥有该单证项下货物的权利之时;此外,只要是出于善意而成为持单者,均可被视为本法所指的合法提单持有人。

(3)本法所称的人在单证中之载明,包括在该单证签发之后,按该单证规定的允许更改该人身份之记载方式,对该人所做的载明;而且本法第1条(3)款(b)项所称的单证对有关人之载明,亦应据此予以解释。

(4)在不违背上述第2条第(2)款及第4条规定的的条件下,本法中的任何规定均不得妨碍本法对有关单证项下的货物已处于下列状态的情况下的适用:(a)货物在单证签发后不复存在;或(b)货物无法辩认(无论是否起因于货物混票或其他任何原因);同时,本法所称与单证有关的货物亦应据此予以解释。

(5)本法前述规定的效力,在任何情况下,均不得影响按《1971年海上货物运输法》第一章和目前产生法律效力的规则(即:海牙/威斯比规则)的适用。

第6条简称、废除、生效及适用范围(1)本法可称为1992年海上货物运输法。

(2)1855年提单法兹予以废除。

(3)本法将于被通过之日起2个月后生效;但本法的任何规定均不得对于本法生效前签发的单证产生效力。

(4)本法延伸适用于北爱尔兰。

Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 (c. 50)An Act to replace the Bills of Lading Act 1855 with new provision with respect to bills of lading and certain other shipping documents.[16th July 1992] Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—Shipping documents etc. to which Act applies.1.—(1) This Act applies to the following documents, that is to say—(a) any bill of lading;(b) any sea waybill; and(c) any ship's delivery order.(2) References in this Act to a bill of lading—(a) do not include references to a document which is incapable oftransfer either by indorsement or, as a bearer bill, by delivery withoutindorsement; but(b) subject to that, do include references to a received for shipment billof lading.(3) References in this Act to a sea waybill are references to any document which is not a bill of lading but—(a) is such a receipt for goods as contains or evidences a contract forthe carriage of goods by sea; and(b) identifies the person to whom delivery of the goods is to be madeby the carrier in accordance with that contract.(4) References in this Act to a ship's delivery order are references to any document which is neither a bill of lading nor a sea waybill but contains an undertaking which—(a) is given under or for the purposes of a contract for the carriage bysea of the goods to which the document relates, or of goods whichinclude those goods; and(b) is an undertaking by the carrier to a person identified in thedocument to deliver the goods to which the document relates to thatperson.(5) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for the application of this Act to cases where a telecommunication system or any other information technology is used for effecting transactions corresponding to—(a) the issue of a document to which this Act applies;(b) the indorsement, delivery or other transfer of such a document; or(c) the doing of anything else in relation to such a document.(6) Regulations under subsection (5) above may—(a) make such modifications of the following provisions of this Act asthe Secretary of State considers appropriate in connection with theapplication of this Act to any case mentioned in that subsection; and(b) contain supplemental, incidental, consequential and transitionalprovision;and the power to make regulations under that subsection shall be exercisable by statutory instrument subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.Rights under shipping documents.2.—(1) Subject to the following provisions of this section, a person who becomes—(a) the lawful holder of a bill of lading;(b) the person who (without being an original party to the contract ofcarriage) is the person to whom delivery of the goods to which a seawaybill relates is to be made by the carrier in accordance with thatcontract; or(c) the person to whom delivery of the goods to which a ship'sdelivery order relates is to be made in accordance with the undertakingcontained in the order,shall (by virtue of becoming the holder of the bill or, as the case may be, the person to whom delivery is to be made) have transferred to and vested in him all rights of suit under the contract of carriage as if he had been a party to that contract.(2) Where, when a person becomes the lawful holder of a bill of lading, possession of the bill no longer gives a right (as against the carrier) to possession of the goods to which the bill relates, that person shall not have any rights transferred to him by virtue of subsection (1) above unless he becomes the holder of the bill—(a) by virtue of a transaction effected in pursuance of any contractualor other arrangements made before the time when such a right topossession ceased to attach to possession of the bill; or(b) as a result of the rejection to that person by another person ofgoods or documents delivered to the other person in pursuance of anysuch arrangements.(3) The rights vested in any person by virtue of the operation of subsection(1) above in relation to a ship's delivery order—(a) shall be so vested subject to the terms of the order; and(b) where the goods to which the order relates form a part only of thegoods to which the contract of carriage relates, shall be confined torights in respect of the goods to which the order relates.(4) Where, in the case of any document to which this Act applies—(a) a person with any interest or right in or in relation to goods towhich the document relates sustains loss or damage in consequence ofa breach of the contract of carriage; but(b) subsection (1) above operates in relation to that document so thatrights of suit in respect of that breach are vested in another person,the other person shall be entitled to exercise those rights for the benefit of theperson who sustained the loss or damage to the same extent as they could have been exercised if they had been vested in the person for whose benefit they are exercised.(5) Where rights are transferred by virtue of the operation of subsection (1) above in relation to any document, the transfer for which that subsection provides shall extinguish any entitlement to those rights which derives—(a) where that document is a bill of lading, from a person's havingbeen an original party to the contract of carriage; or(b) in the case of any document to which this Act applies, from theprevious operation of that subsection in relation to that document;but the operation of that subsection shall be without prejudice to any rights which derive from a person's having been an original party to the contract contained in, or evidenced by, a sea waybill and, in relation to a ship's delivery order, shall be without prejudice to any rights deriving otherwise than from the previous operation of that subsection in relation to that order.Liabilities under shipping documents. 3.—(1) Where subsection (1) of section 2 of this Act operates in relation to any document to which this Act applies and the person in whom rights are vested by virtue of that subsection—(a) takes or demands delivery from the carrier of any of the goods towhich the document relates;(b) makes a claim under the contract of carriage against the carrier inrespect of any of those goods; or(c) is a person who, at a time before those rights were vested in him,took or demanded delivery from the carrier of any of those goods,that person shall (by virtue of taking or demanding delivery or making the claim or, in a case falling within paragraph (c) above, of having the rights vested in him) become subject to the same liabilities under that contract as if he had been a party to that contract.(2) Where the goods to which a ship's delivery order relates form a part only of the goods to which the contract of carriage relates, the liabilities to which any person is subject by virtue of the operation of this section in relation to that order shall exclude liabilities in respect of any goods to which the order does not relate.(3) This section, so far as it imposes liabilities under any contract on any person, shall be without prejudice to the liabilities under the contract of any person as an original party to the contract.Representations in bills of lading. 4. A bill of lading which—(a) represents goods to have been shipped on board a vessel or to havebeen received for shipment on board a vessel; and(b) has been signed by the master of the vessel or by a person who wasnot the master but had the express, implied or apparent authority of thecarrier to sign bills of lading,shall, in favour of a person who has become the lawful holder of the bill, beconclusive evidence against the carrier of the shipment of the goods or, as thecase may be, of their receipt for shipment.Interpretation etc. 5.—(1) In this Act—"bill of lading", "sea waybill" and "ship's delivery order" shall beconstrued in accordance with section 1 above;"the contract of carriage"—(a) in relation to a bill of lading or sea waybill, means thecontract contained in or evidenced by that bill or waybill; and(b) in relation to a ship's delivery order, means the contractunder or for the purposes of which the undertaking containedin the order is given;"holder", in relation to a bill of lading, shall be construed in accordancewith subsection (2) below;"information technology" includes any computer or other technologyby means of which information or other matter may be recorded orcommunicated without being reduced to documentary form; and"telecommunication system" has the same meaning as in the [1984c. 12.] Telecommunications Act 1984.(2) References in this Act to the holder of a bill of lading are references toany of the following persons, that is to say—(a) a person with possession of the bill who, by virtue of being theperson identified in the bill, is the consignee of the goods to which thebill relates;(b) a person with possession of the bill as a result of the completion,by delivery of the bill, of any indorsement of the bill or , in the case ofa bearer bill, of any other transfer of the bill;(c) a person with possession of the bill as a result of any transaction byvirtue of which he would have become a holder falling withinparagraph (a) or (b) above had not the transaction been effected at atime when possession of the bill no longer gave a right (as against thecarrier) to possession of the goods to which the bill relates;and a person shall be regarded for the purposes of this Act as having becomethe lawful holder of a bill of lading wherever he has become the holder of thebill in good faith.(3) References in this Act to a person's being identified in a documentinclude references to his being identified by a description which allows for theidentity of the person in question to be varied, in accordance with the terms ofthe document, after its issue; and the reference in section 1(3)(b) of this Act to adocument's identifying a person shall be construed accordingly.(4) Without prejudice to sections 2(2) and 4 above, nothing in this Act shall preclude its operation in relation to a case where the goods to which a document relates—(a) cease to exist after the issue of the document; or(b) cannot be identified (whether because they are mixed with othergoods or for any other reason);and references in this Act to the goods to which a document relates shall be construed accordingly.(5) The preceding provisions of this Act shall have effect without prejudice to the application, in relation to any case, of the rules (the Hague-Visby Rules) which for the time being have the force of law by virtue of section 1 of the [1971 c. 19.] Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971.Short title, repeal, commencement and extent. 6.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992.(2) The [1855 c. 111.] Bills of Lading Act 1855 is hereby repealed.(3) This Act shall come into force at the end of the period of two months beginning with the day on which it is passed; but nothing in this Act shall have effect in relation to any document issued before the coming into force of this Act.(4) This Act extends to Northern Ireland.。

相关文档
最新文档