• <cite id="fykrq"><tr id="fykrq"></tr></cite>
  • <output id="fykrq"><tr id="fykrq"></tr></output>

  • <meter id="fykrq"><ins id="fykrq"></ins></meter>
          林芳律師

          林芳

          律師
          服務(wù)地區(qū):浙江-杭州

          擅長:合同糾紛,涉外糾紛,公司企業(yè)

          林芳律師代理涉外海事海商訴訟案件

          來源:林芳律師
          發(fā)布時(shí)間:2021-03-30
          人瀏覽

          涉外海事海商訴訟

          ——一起針對(duì)*國航運(yùn)公司無單放貨的勝訴案件


          案情簡介2020*月份,JG公司(以下簡稱JG)與*國客商MA達(dá)成汽車零配件的國際貨物買賣合同,合同約定裝運(yùn)港寧波,轉(zhuǎn)運(yùn)***,目的港******港,貿(mào)易方式FOB。合同簽訂后,JG通過NB外輪公司以多式聯(lián)運(yùn)的方式將貨物交給*國航運(yùn)公司承運(yùn),NB外輪公司以*國航運(yùn)公司代理人身份向JG簽發(fā)了三份*國航運(yùn)公司的正本提單。貨物到達(dá)*國之后,*國航運(yùn)公司在沒有核實(shí)正本提單的情況下就將貨物放行給MA,導(dǎo)致JG的貨款無法收回。遂成訟。

          律師代理

          本案委托之前,代理律師向JG的負(fù)責(zé)人詳細(xì)了解案件情況,仔

          細(xì)分析案卷材料,從現(xiàn)有材料中能夠反映*國航運(yùn)公司無單放貨的事實(shí),且無單放貨行為沒有法定免責(zé)事由。故接受委托提起訴訟,要求*國航運(yùn)公司承擔(dān)貨款損失和相應(yīng)利息的賠償責(zé)任;對(duì)于內(nèi)陸運(yùn)費(fèi)損失,原告一并主張。

          主體名稱:本案提單上記載承運(yùn)人是A*&B*,根據(jù)字面翻譯是*國航運(yùn)和物流服務(wù)公司。裁判文書公開網(wǎng)也查找到多份以*國航運(yùn)和物流服務(wù)公司(E*&L*)為主體的判決書,所以在起訴時(shí)就以此作為訴訟主體訴至寧波海事法院。法院在審理過程中發(fā)現(xiàn)該院歷年涉及*國航運(yùn)和物流服務(wù)公司的主體名稱是*國航運(yùn)公司,該公司在交通部注冊無船承運(yùn)人使用的中文名是*國航運(yùn)公司E*&L*。雖然其他法院有使用不同中文名的情況,但考慮到訴訟主體名稱的一致性以及方便統(tǒng)計(jì)、查閱,寧波海事法院決定使用*國航運(yùn)公司作為E*&L*的中文名。


          在涉外訴訟中,在不同時(shí)段不同法院處理的多起案件中,保持境外主體中文名字的統(tǒng)一性和一致性是比較困難的事情,筆者認(rèn)為翻譯因素和文化認(rèn)知因素以及其他多方面原因都是導(dǎo)致這種情況發(fā)生的原因。寧波海事法院以交通部備案主體名稱為依據(jù)進(jìn)行主體名稱統(tǒng)一化,大大方便了同一主體案件的查閱和統(tǒng)計(jì)。


            案件送達(dá)*國航運(yùn)公司在中國沒有設(shè)立代表處,也沒有分公司、子公司。提起訴訟前我方多次通過*國航運(yùn)公司的代理人NB外輪公司和北京的代理商溝通無單放貨事宜。我方在起訴時(shí)提交了與NB外輪公司和北京的代理商進(jìn)行溝通的電子郵件,以及我方直接與*國航運(yùn)公司聯(lián)系的往來郵件。《中華人民共和國和*國聯(lián)邦民主共和國關(guān)于民事和商事司法協(xié)助的條約》對(duì)*國國的主體送達(dá)設(shè)定了送達(dá)路徑,寧波海事法院根據(jù)條約送達(dá)的同時(shí),郵寄司法文書至*國航運(yùn)公司本國地址和代理人處,以在先收到時(shí)間為送達(dá)時(shí)間,大大加快了案件的辦理進(jìn)程。

           

          無單放貨的識(shí)別

          Identification of unbilled releases

          本案貨物裝在一個(gè)40尺高柜集裝箱,集裝箱流轉(zhuǎn)軌跡顯示20207月份集裝箱已空箱流轉(zhuǎn),在雙方郵件往來中,*國航運(yùn)公司承認(rèn)已放貨,三份正本提單仍然在原告處,所以本案被告無單放貨的事實(shí)明確。


          在無單放貨引發(fā)的訴訟中,如何識(shí)別無單放貨是一個(gè)難題。一般情況下,從以下幾個(gè)方面進(jìn)行初步識(shí)別:

          In the litigations arising from the unbillable goods, how to identify the unbillable acts is a difficult problem. In general, the identification is made from the following aspects.

          1. 正本提單持有人手持正本提單在目的港要求提貨卻不能;

          2. 貨物整柜運(yùn)輸?shù)?,集裝箱已空箱流轉(zhuǎn);

          3. 正本提單沒有從境內(nèi)賣方流轉(zhuǎn)到境外買方,但目的港公開市場上有所涉貨物銷售的;

          4. 承運(yùn)人承認(rèn)放貨;(本案中,原告提交集裝箱空箱流轉(zhuǎn)憑證,被告承認(rèn)無單放貨)

          5. 貨運(yùn)代理人告知提單持有人貨物已放行的事實(shí);

          6. 目的港集裝箱堆場出具的提貨證明。

          I.The original bill of lading holder requests for the goods at the port of destination but can not.

          II.The whole container of goods transported, the container has been empty flow.

          III.The original bill of lading has not been transferred from the domestic seller to the buyer out, but the open market at the port of destination involves the sell of the goods loaded in the container.

          4. The carrier acknowledges the release of goods; (in this case, the plaintiff submits a certificate of empty container flow, the defendant acknowledges the release of goods without a bill of lading)

          5. Freight agent informs the bill of lading holder of the fact that the goods have been released.

          6.The container yard at the port of destination issued the certificate of delivery.

          本案不存在無正本提單交付貨物的免責(zé)事由

          There is no exemption for the delivery of goods without original bill of lading in this case.

          最高人民法院《關(guān)于審理無正本提單交付貨物案件適用法律若干問題的規(guī)定》規(guī)定了幾種無正本提單交付貨物的免責(zé)事由。第七條規(guī)定承運(yùn)人依照提單載明的卸貨港所在地法律規(guī)定,必須將承運(yùn)到港的貨物交付給當(dāng)?shù)睾jP(guān)或者港口當(dāng)局的,不承擔(dān)無正本提單交付貨物的民事責(zé)任。第八條規(guī)定承運(yùn)到港的貨物超過法律規(guī)定期限無人向海關(guān)申報(bào),被海關(guān)提取并依法變賣處理,或者法院依法裁定拍賣承運(yùn)人留置的貨物,承運(yùn)人主張免除交付貨物責(zé)任的,人民法院應(yīng)予支持。第九條規(guī)定承運(yùn)人按照記名提單托運(yùn)人的要求中止運(yùn)輸、返還貨物、變更到達(dá)地或者將貨物交給其他收貨人,持有記名提單的收貨人要求承運(yùn)人承擔(dān)無正本提單交付貨物民事責(zé)任的,人民法院不予支持。第十條規(guī)定承運(yùn)人簽發(fā)一式數(shù)份正本提單,向最先提交正本提單的人交付貨物后,其他持有相同正本提單的人要求承運(yùn)人承擔(dān)無正本提單交付貨物民事責(zé)任的,人民法院不予支持。”本案中,*國航運(yùn)公司交付貨物的行為不符合上述任何一種情形,故*國航運(yùn)公司不存在免責(zé)事由,需要承擔(dān)賠償責(zé)任。

          The supreme people's court " several issues on the trial of the case of delivery of goods without original bill of lading applicable law provisions" provides several exemptions for delivery of goods without original bill of lading. Article 7 states:If a carrier is obligated, according to the provisions of the laws of the place where the port of discharge is located stated in the bill of lading, to deliver the goods arrived at the port of discharge to the local authority in charge of customs or port, the carrier shall not bear the civil liability for delivery of goods without any original bill of lading.”Article 8 states:”In the case no customs declaration is made for the goods that have arrived at the port of discharge within the time limit specified by laws and the relevant customs collects the goods and sells them legally, or the relevant court renders a decision, in accordance with law, to sell the goods left by the carrier, if the carrier alleges the exemption from liability for delivery of goods, the people's court shall uphold such allegation.” Article 9 states:Where a carrier, according to the requirements by the consignor of a straight B/L, suspends the shipment, returns the goods, changes the port of destination or delivers the goods to other consignees, if the consignee who holds the straight B/L requests the carrier to bear the civil liability for delivery of goods without the original bill of lading, the people's court shall not uphold such request. Article 10 states:Where a carrier issues an original B/L in multiple copies, after the carrier delivers the goods to the person who first submits the original B/L, if other persons who hold the same original B/L request the carrier to bear the civil liability for delivery of goods without the original B/L, the people's court shall not uphold such request. In this case, the delivery of goods by Ethiopian Shipping Company does not fit any of the above circumstances, so Ethiopian Shipping Company is not exempted from civil liability.

          損失確定:

          Determination of loss

          我國《海商法》第55條規(guī)定:“貨物滅失的賠償額,按照貨物的實(shí)際價(jià)值計(jì)算;貨物損壞的賠償額,按照貨物受損前后實(shí)際價(jià)值的差額或者貨物的修復(fù)費(fèi)用計(jì)算。貨物的實(shí)際價(jià)值,按照貨物裝船時(shí)的價(jià)值加保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)加運(yùn)費(fèi)計(jì)算?!?根據(jù)此條規(guī)定,在無單放貨的損失賠償中采用CIF的計(jì)價(jià)方式進(jìn)行賠償。本案采用FOB貿(mào)易方式,我方?jīng)]有產(chǎn)生海運(yùn)費(fèi)和保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)的損失,僅是貨款損失。我方在出口時(shí)嚴(yán)格按照雙方約定的價(jià)格進(jìn)行報(bào)關(guān),出口報(bào)關(guān)單上記載的貨值即是我方的實(shí)際貨值損失的計(jì)算基礎(chǔ)。

          Article 55 of China's Maritime Law provides that ‘The compensation for loss of goods shall be calculated in accordance with the actual value of the goods; the compensation for damage to the goods shall be calculated in accordance with the difference between the actual value of the goods before and after the damage or the cost of repairing the goods. The actual value of the goods is calculated in accordance with the value of the goods at the time of loading on board plus the insurance premium and freight.’According to this article, the damages in the case of unbilled release of goods are compensated by the valuation method of CIF. In this case, the FOB trade method was adopted, and we did not incur the loss of sea freight and insurance, but only the loss of payment for the goods. When we exported, we declared the goods in accordance with the price agreed by both parties strictly, and the value of the goods recorded on the export declaration is the basis for calculating our actual loss of goods value.

          法院判決

          [Court Decision]

          本案經(jīng)過充分的庭前溝通,經(jīng)過一次開庭審理,法院當(dāng)庭宣判支持我方關(guān)于要求*國航運(yùn)公司承擔(dān)貨值損失和利息損失賠償責(zé)任的訴訟請(qǐng)求。關(guān)于我方要求賠償在履行貿(mào)易合同時(shí)產(chǎn)生了內(nèi)陸費(fèi)用損失,法院認(rèn)為內(nèi)陸費(fèi)用不是無單放貨產(chǎn)生的損失,即便*國航運(yùn)公司沒有無單放貨,原告也需要自行承擔(dān)該部分內(nèi)陸費(fèi)用,故對(duì)此不予賠償。

          After a full pre-trial communication and a court hearing, the court ruled in favor of our claim for compensation for the loss of cargo value and interest incurred by the Ethiopian Shipping Company. Regarding our claim for compensation for the loss of inland expenses incurred in the performance of the trade contract, the court held that the inland expenses were not losses arising from the unbilled release of goods, and even if the Ethiopian shipping company did not release the goods without a bill of lading, the plaintiff had to bear the inland expenses on its own, so it would not compensate for this.

          本案起訴前代理律師多次致電交通部、多省交通廳確認(rèn)溝通*國航運(yùn)公司作為中國無船承運(yùn)人的備案和保證金事宜。了解到自2019年以來,交通部取消了對(duì)無船承運(yùn)人的備案和保證金制度,將無船承運(yùn)人備案工作落實(shí)到省級(jí)交通廳。NB外輪公司在簽發(fā)*國航運(yùn)公司的正本提單時(shí),交通部早已取消了*國航運(yùn)公司的備案,*國航運(yùn)公司也沒有及時(shí)到省級(jí)交通廳進(jìn)行無船承運(yùn)人備案和提單登記。《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理海上貨運(yùn)代理糾紛案件若干問題的規(guī)定》第十二條規(guī)定貨運(yùn)代理企業(yè)接受未在我國交通主管部門辦理提單登記的無船承運(yùn)業(yè)務(wù)經(jīng)營者的委托簽發(fā)提單,當(dāng)事人主張由貨運(yùn)代理企業(yè)和無船承運(yùn)業(yè)務(wù)經(jīng)營者對(duì)提單項(xiàng)下的損失承擔(dān)連帶責(zé)任的,人民法院應(yīng)予支持。根據(jù)此條規(guī)定,NB外輪公司在簽發(fā)提單時(shí)明知*國航運(yùn)公司沒有進(jìn)行無船承運(yùn)人備案,不具有中國境內(nèi)的無船承運(yùn)人身份,仍然以代理人身份簽發(fā)*國航運(yùn)公司的提單,原告有權(quán)要求NB外輪公司承擔(dān)*國航運(yùn)賠償責(zé)任的連帶責(zé)任。但考慮到需要繼續(xù)與NB外輪公司進(jìn)行業(yè)務(wù)合作,故原告不予追究NB外輪公司的連帶責(zé)任。

          Before the prosecution of this case, the attorney called the Ministry of Transportation and several provincial departments of transportation several times to confirm the communication of the filing and bonding of Ethiopian Shipping Company as a NVOCC in China. We learned that since 2019, the Ministry of Transportation has abolished the filing and bonding system for NVOCCs and implemented the filing of NVOCCs to provincial departments of transportation.When NB Foreign Shipping Company issued the original bill of lading of Ethiopian Shipping Company, the Ministry of Transportation has cancelled the filing of Ethiopian Shipping Company, and Ethiopian Shipping Company did not timely go to the provincial department of transportation for NVOCC filing and bill of lading registration. Article 12 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Trial of Disputes over Maritime Freight Forwarders stipulates that If the freight forwarder accepts the entrustment of the NVOCC business operator who has not registered the bill of lading with the competent Transportation Department of our country to issue the bill of lading, and the parties claim that the freight forwarder and the NVOCC business operator shall bear joint liability for the losses under the bill of lading, the people's court shall support them. According to this article, the NB Foreign Shipping Company issued the bill of lading with the knowledge that the Ethiopian Shipping Company did not make NVOCC record and did not have the NVOCC status in China, but still issued the bill of lading of the Ethiopian Shipping Company as an agent, so the plaintiff was entitled to request the NB Foreign Shipping Company to bear the joint and several liability of the Ethiopian Shipping Company's liability. However, considering the need to continue business  with NB Foreign Shipping Company, the plaintiff will not pursue the joint and several liability of NB Foreign Shipping Company.

          【相關(guān)法律】

          [Related Laws]

          《中華人民共和國海商法》

          《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理海上貨運(yùn)代理糾紛案件若干問題的規(guī)定》

          《中華人民共和國和*國聯(lián)邦民主共和國關(guān)于民事和商事司法協(xié)助的條約》

          《中華人民共和國涉外民事關(guān)系法律適用法》

          MARITIME CODE OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

          The Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Trial of Cases of Maritime Freight Forwarders

          Treaty between the People's Republic of China and the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia on Mutual Legal Assistance in Civil and Commercial Matters

          Law of the PRC on Application of Laws to Foreign-Related Civil Relations


          以上內(nèi)容由林芳律師提供,若您案情緊急,法律快車建議您致電林芳律師咨詢。
          林芳律師
          林芳律師主辦律師
          幫助過 377 萬人好評(píng):15
          • 經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富
          • 態(tài)度好
          • 解答快
          浙江省杭州市西湖區(qū)90號(hào)東部軟件園創(chuàng)新大廈B座8層
          律師信息LAWYER INFORMATION
          • 律師姓名:林芳
          • 執(zhí)業(yè)律所:浙江智仁律師事務(wù)所
          • 職  務(wù):主辦律師
          • 執(zhí)業(yè)證號(hào):13301*********285
          聯(lián)系本人CONTACT ME
          • 服務(wù)地區(qū):浙江-杭州
          • 地  址:
            浙江省杭州市西湖區(qū)90號(hào)東部軟件園創(chuàng)新大廈B座8層
          亚洲成人无码网站在线观看,日韩AV成人片观看,69堂成人精品视频在线观看免费,最新国产成人AB网站 (function(){ var bp = document.createElement('script'); var curProtocol = window.location.protocol.split(':')[0]; if (curProtocol === 'https') { bp.src = 'https://zz.bdstatic.com/linksubmit/push.js'; } else { bp.src = 'http://push.zhanzhang.baidu.com/push.js'; } var s = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(bp, s); })();