Le Transport Maritime Sous Connaissement. By MICHEL POURCELET,. Professor of Law at the University of Montreal. [Montreal: Les. Presses de L’ Universite. (X). Commodities requiring special or additional care or attention in handling or stowing must be so marked and packaged as to ensure safe transportation with. Connaissement transport maritime pdf merge. Western mediterranean ecoregion wme maritime transport definition maritime transport relates to the carriage of.
|Published (Last):||17 November 2013|
|PDF File Size:||6.27 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.14 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Le transport de march Mais plus souvent, le transporteur pouvait aussi accepter le transport pour un fret majeur.
Mais quels sont ces autres documents? The whole agitation for restrictive legislation of this kind arises quite naturally out of the modern conditions of liner carriage, where you have the lines established regularly running from one port to another, carrying all kinds and conditions of cargo, where there is no preliminary agreement between the particular shipowner and the particular shipper as to the conditions applicable to the particular cargo.
In regard to tramp ships the position is utterly different. I think a bill of lading is a bill of lading. If it is a fully negotiable document I do not think in law it is possible to distinguish between the one that is issued by the liner and the one issued by the tramp.
I do not think it would be satisfactory to anybody. I do not think it would be satisfactory to the tramp if he was putting on to the market, for the purpose of assisting the credit of the merchants and the bankers, anything in the nature of an inferior bill of lading.
I can say that the general feeling of our shipowners is that it is desirable to arrive at a uniform international regulation of the question. But we should like to come to such a regulation in a free way, that is to say, that the rights and liabilities of both parties should be regulated by rules accepted by both parties of their own free will Hear, hearand not under pressure of legislation.
That is also the standpoint of the International Chamber of Commerce, which held its conference in July last in London. There the general opinion expressed was that we must try to get to a uniform regulation, not along the way of settlement by law, but on the lines of free understanding between the parties interested. I am very strongly under the impression that we must not seek for help from the Governments, but that we should try to come trsnsport an arrangement.
Le Transport maritime sous connaissement à l’heure du marché commun in SearchWorks catalog
But when you have to deal with the conference liners, they, of course, quite in a business way, all combine to connajssement certain bills of lading worded connalssement a certain way, so that they may work in conference, and they cannot get out of it, and, with such clauses in the bills of lading as there marritime now, no cargo connaisesment can make any bargain with the shipowner.
He has simply to ship his goods in accordance with the bills of lading which exist in the conference lines, or otherwise to have his cargo shut out or refused. For instance, if, through the negligent navigation of the pilot, the ship is run on the rocks and holed, she ceases to be seaworthy. There cannot be an overriding obligation on the shipowner to keep the ship seaworthy throughout the voyage: When this maritimr drafted, I think all of the interests clearly agreed that the obligation, and the only obligation, they wanted to put on the shipowner was that the ship shall be seaworthy when she starts loading, that she shall be seaworthy when she starts on the voyage.
If he has done that, he has done his connaisement, and then the voyage is made under the conditions set out in No. Chairman, Gentlemen the purpose of this amendement is to clarify what is the value of the hill of lading as evidence. I think that most of the Delegations here have stated in their reports that this is not a problem since there is no doubt that the bill of lading has the value of conclusive evidence as regards third parlies and on this assumption it has been pointed out that there is no reason to change the mqritime wording, but unfortunately in some countries this problem has arisen and there have been many decisions stating that according to the Hague Rules the value of the bill of lading as evidence is just the trwnsport of prima facie evidence so that the carrier is allowed also vis a vis a bonafide holder of the bill of lading to prove against the wording of the bill of lading.
We think that this interpretation is completely wrong and that if this interpretation be held valid the value of the bill of lading as a document of title would be completely lost and consequently we submit to your consideration the advisability of adding a new sentence in order to make clear to everybody that the bill of lading as regards a bone fide holder has the value of conclusive maritims.
I propose to read the clause, as to the disputed part of it, in the form in which it has been discussed in the conversation. Now, Gentlemen, I maritimr it is within my province as Chairman to remind you what is in question. It is not insurance. That is a separate business.
My own impression, after listening to the discussion, is that diligence and tranpsort will be best secured, under present conditions, by fixing the amount at per package.
It is a rough and ready way. I ask the Committee if it is possible to accept this form of words by common consent. Nous ne pouvons faire une convention si nous ne prenons pas une formule, qui couvre ces deux cas. Sur la conception du contrat de transport en common law, cf. The one I happen to hold in my hand actually has these words: We transpogt from time to time endeavoured to get it altered, but we have given up long ago, because it is so much the constituted custom of New York, for reasons that we shipowners personally know very well – we have tried to beat it mariti,e before, but it is absolutely impossible – that all hills of lading must connnaissement issued when the goods are received on the wharf for shipment, and one of our great difficulties to-day in dealing with the pilferage question is that we cannot bring our bills of lading down to “shipped” bills of lading, so that we are only responsible for what goes into the ship.
We marigime taking steps to try to amend that as best we can, but connaossement great difficulty in our stopping pilferage in New York is that we are obliged by the custom, and I believe law, port regulations, or something, in America to issue bills of lading that we get in this form. I feel sensible that this meeting is representing European interests. I have not heard any representatives of the States speak. I am afraid they are not here. Therefore, as an inefficient representative of the trade, although not representing America, I would like to emphasise that the whole general cargo trade from America is done on such bills of lading, and I presume that the bankers have some method, and have had for the past thirty years or however long it has been going on, without all these difficulties, of tackling that position.
The bankers, like everybody else, have to fall into the line which commerce of its own motion adopts. But at present, under the state of our law, very great difficulties arise in regard to these “received for shipment” hills of lading. Those doubts within the last three weeks, or the last month or so, have unfortunately tgansport fulfilled. He has opened a credit which calls for the usual shipping documents, or some similar phrase, or calls perhaps in detail for bills of lading, invoices and insurance policies.
I do not know what happened marjtime that particular case, but it is quite obvious that in that case it might have been that the documents were thrown back on the hands of the bankers because they had not carried out, in accepting this document, the terms upon which they were authorised to grant the credit. It is an old-established principle in English law, it is established finally and for trannsport lime until a statute alters it, that where a contract calls for a shipment made in a certain month, that is connaisdement matter which goes to the root of the whole contract, as transpirt a description of the goods.
That was decided in the case of Bowes v. Shand2 App. Let us assume a banker opening a credit for a February-March shipment: If they are shipped in the month of April, even on the 1st April, then under the decision in Bowes v. Shand the description of the goods is not in accordance with the contract, and the hanker, on a falling market, may find those goods thrown back upon his hands. But, Gentlemen, you must please understand exactly what our difficulties are, and give us the means of meeting them.
Now all our credits to-day, except in particular trades, have been opened upon the basis of certain documents. What is the remedy? BOI, La lettera di trasporto marittimo, Milano,p. Kay Pineus, process verbal p. Rein Sweden The second proposal is in regard to the so-called unit limitation.
This is a point where international unity has never been achieved. The unit limitation rule has been interpreted differently in the different contracting States, not only by the judiciaries of those States but even by the legislators.
Therefore, the unity aimed at has not been achieved and there is no harm in looking for a better solution. We believe that a better solution is to be found because the unit limitation in itself apart from the fact that international unity has not been achieved, is not a good one.
Since the unit limitation was introduced as a novelty in the Hague Rules, we now have other conventions on the transport of goods by rail, road and air. In connaissemnt these conventions the simple kilogram limitation has been adopted. We believe that the time has come when maritime transport should join the other industries. There is no longer any reason for this maritime peculiarity.
It is not even a good one that is, it is not universal.
yransport But this very purpose is likely to be frustrated if it becomes incumbent on a ship owner in order to avoid what he would regard as an excessive liability to open every container and connaisesment its contents. I do not believe that this will be accepted by the commercial world.
Under this paragraph all you will have to do is to look at the bill of lading and see, does it contain any figures of the numbers of packages other than the containers themselves. The clause is drafted in this way, because you may get in a bill of lading a variety of descriptions of goods in a container.
You look at the bill of lading, you see the figure 20, and you know that each of those 20 packages is a unit for the purpose of calculating the connaisdement.
There is only one figure on the hill of lading, therefore the container is the package for the purpose of calculating fonnaissement maximum. But you may get the mixed case and we are providing for the future and we want to deal with all cases – where the hill of lading says one container containing four crates of typewriters and general merchandise.
Well, what is to he done then? The answer is provided by paragraph iv. You look at the hill of lading and you see that there is the figure 4 relating to tranzport crates of typewriters.
Each of those crates of typewriters is a unit for the purpose of calculating the maximum. You look at the hill of lading and you see that there is also general merchandise without any figure in front of it, and mariyime the clause says the container with the general merchandise, is to he treated as an other fransport.
So this is a perfectly simple way of seeing from the hill of lading what the maximum liability of the shipper is for the goods. And it has this advantage and this is essential in anything we are trying to do for commerce – that it leaves it to the shipper and the carrier to maditime their own bargain as to whether they want the higher maximum on the internal package basis and the higher freight, or the lower freight on the basis of the container and its contents being the package.
Ever General, DMF,p. President my delegation fully supports the amendment of the Sub-Committee and wishes to briefly explain why.
Chapitre I. Le transport de marchandises par mer
It has been stated by Mr. Loeff that there is a principle of Roman law whereby there cannot be an action in tort when there is an action arising out of a contract. In our submission this should be true, but unfortunately the principle that when there is a right of action in contract there cannot be a right of action in tort should be applied in any case, in many circumstances has not been upheld by our Supreme Court.
It has in fact been repeatedly stated by our Supreme Court transpott one may violate the general principle of neminem laedere even if this violation is committed by one party to a contract. The effect of this violation infringes upon the general rules and entitles the party who suffered the damage as a consequence of this violation to act in tort under the contract. We believe that it trwnsport very important that we try to confine the application of the rule of tort to tort cases only and we try to explain and to clarify here that when we have a contract, only the law governing such contract applies, and by so doing we are not putting a rule of tort in the law of contract.
We are just explaining very clearly that where we have a contract only the rules of the contract must apply and that the rule of tort cannot apply. It has been matitime that this danger could be avoided by means of clauses in the bills of lading but unfortunately, at least under our law, no connaissementt clause connwissement be considered connaussement because the law of tort, if it is connsissement applicable would, of course, overcome any contractual provision.
First of all, two cases are contemplated as quite distinct between them: But these two places are normally the same in as much as, according to article 3, paragraph 3, of the Convention, the carrier is duty hound to issue the bill of lading.
I do not remember to have seen a single case in which a bill of lading was issued in a place different from the port of loading. La question du cabotage, comme M. Article 5 of the Stockholm Draft Article 5 should read as follows: Article 10 of the Convention is deleted and replaced by the following: With regret, however, it cannot accept the Stockholm Draft which in its view conflicts with these principles connaissemejt so far as it binds Contracting States to disregard the law of the countries having real connection with the bill of lading if the port of discharge happens to be situated in a Contracting State.
This involves an assertion on the part of Contracting States of the right connaiasement dictate the terms upon which persons who are not their nationals may enter into contracts in a non-Contracting State for the carriage of goods from such State in ships which are under the flag of a non-Contracting State notwithstanding that the connaissemwnt so dictated are contrary to the law of the non-Contracting State in which the contract is made.
Article 5 — Each Contracting State shall apply the ocnnaissement of this Convention to every bill of lading relating to: According to it, the Convention covers any other carriage if the contract contained in or evidenced by the bill of lading provides that the Rules of the Convention or legislation of any State giving effect to them are to govern the contract.