The purpose of this study aims to analyse the key differences of the sea waybill and electronic B/L in the international transport documents. Sea waybills look remarkably like ordinary bills of lading. Indeed, in two important ways, they are just like bills of lading: the front of the document will ...
The purpose of this study aims to analyse the key differences of the sea waybill and electronic B/L in the international transport documents. Sea waybills look remarkably like ordinary bills of lading. Indeed, in two important ways, they are just like bills of lading: the front of the document will near a description of the quantity and apparent condition of the goods; and the back of the document provides evidence of the terms of the contract of carriage. They differ from bills of lading in that, far from indicating that the goods described are deliverable to the order of the shipper or of the consignee, they will make it explicit that the goods are deliverable only to the consignee. Again, different carries will do thai in a variety of ways. For example, the document may call itself non-negotiable, omitting the word order from the consignee box on the front of the document, and stating explicitly that the goods will be deliverable to the consignee or his authorised representative on proper proof of identity and authorisation. The Hague-Visby Rules and Hamburg Rules give no guidance as to any right to instruct the carrier in respect of goods while they are in transit. However, in applying Article 50 of the Rotterdam Rules, in particular when applying it in the context of seawaybills, straight bills of lading or ship's delivery orders, regard would need to be had to preserve the shipper's rights under any of those three documents even after the buyer of goods covered by them has acquired rights of its own. And, the right of control is defined at Article 1.12 of the Rotterdam Rules. The right to give instruction is further limited by the terms of Article 50.1 to three particular types of instruction in respect of the goods, relating broadly to the goods, their delivery en route, and the identity of the consignee. And, the CMI formulated the CMI Uniform Rules for Sea Waybills for voluntary incorporation into any contract of carriage covered by such a document. Recognising that neither the Hague nor the Hague-Visby Rules are applicable to sea waybills, the CMI Rules provide that a contract of carriage covered by a waybill shall be governed by whichever international or national law, if any, would have been compulsorily applicable if the contract had in fact been covered by a bill of lading or similar document of title.
The purpose of this study aims to analyse the key differences of the sea waybill and electronic B/L in the international transport documents. Sea waybills look remarkably like ordinary bills of lading. Indeed, in two important ways, they are just like bills of lading: the front of the document will near a description of the quantity and apparent condition of the goods; and the back of the document provides evidence of the terms of the contract of carriage. They differ from bills of lading in that, far from indicating that the goods described are deliverable to the order of the shipper or of the consignee, they will make it explicit that the goods are deliverable only to the consignee. Again, different carries will do thai in a variety of ways. For example, the document may call itself non-negotiable, omitting the word order from the consignee box on the front of the document, and stating explicitly that the goods will be deliverable to the consignee or his authorised representative on proper proof of identity and authorisation. The Hague-Visby Rules and Hamburg Rules give no guidance as to any right to instruct the carrier in respect of goods while they are in transit. However, in applying Article 50 of the Rotterdam Rules, in particular when applying it in the context of seawaybills, straight bills of lading or ship's delivery orders, regard would need to be had to preserve the shipper's rights under any of those three documents even after the buyer of goods covered by them has acquired rights of its own. And, the right of control is defined at Article 1.12 of the Rotterdam Rules. The right to give instruction is further limited by the terms of Article 50.1 to three particular types of instruction in respect of the goods, relating broadly to the goods, their delivery en route, and the identity of the consignee. And, the CMI formulated the CMI Uniform Rules for Sea Waybills for voluntary incorporation into any contract of carriage covered by such a document. Recognising that neither the Hague nor the Hague-Visby Rules are applicable to sea waybills, the CMI Rules provide that a contract of carriage covered by a waybill shall be governed by whichever international or national law, if any, would have been compulsorily applicable if the contract had in fact been covered by a bill of lading or similar document of title.
무역서류를 전자메시지로 대체하려는 움직임은 오래 전부터 있어 왔고, 상당수의 국가가 전자자료교환(Electronic Data Interchange: EDI) 및 인터넷에 의한 서류의 전자화를 추진하여 왔다. EDI 거래의 장점으로는 비용의 절감, 중복입력의 생략, 대고객 서비스 향상 등을 들 수 있다. 인터넷은 개별통신망을 범세계적으로 상호 연결함으로써 자유로운 정보전달 및 습득을 가능하게 함은 물론 대중매체의 활용과 사용자 중심의 활용방법을 제공하고 있어 새로운 통신방법으로 부상되고 있다.
현재 해상화물운송장의 한계로 지적되는 부분은 무엇인가?
이 사태를 해결하는 방안의 하나로서 해상화물운송장(Sea Waybill, 이하 “SWB”라 한다)이 주목되고 있다. 그러나 이 SWB는 금융기관의 채권보전상의 문제 등도 지적되어 선하증권과 비교하면 아직 일반화되지 못하고 있다.
전자선하증권이란?
이에 응하여 제 3자가 권리를 양수하는 취지를 운송인에게 응답하면 운송인은 그 제3자에게 새로운 개인키를 발급하고 이에 의하여 권리이전이 완성된다.3) 전자선하증권은 종래의 종이선하증권에 갈음하여 송하인 또는 용선자의 동의를 얻어 지정 등록기관4)에 등록을 하는 방식으로 발행하는 선하증권이다.5) 또한 선하증권의 위조를 방지하고 전자기술의 발달로 인하여 전통적 유통증권인 선하증권이 SWB라는 비유통성 운송문서로 대체됨에 따라 이와 같은 문서를 EDI 방식으로 전달할 필요성이 생겼다.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.