Background and Aim: One of the controversial issues in maritime transport law is the issue of delays in the loading and unloading of ships (demolition) and delays in the delivery of goods; Therefore, regulating the contractual relationship between the consignor and the
More
Background and Aim: One of the controversial issues in maritime transport law is the issue of delays in the loading and unloading of ships (demolition) and delays in the delivery of goods; Therefore, regulating the contractual relationship between the consignor and the transport operator is a challenging issue in various legal systems and in international conventions. On the other hand, the sender of the goods may also be responsible for paying damages due to delays in the operations of loading and unloading or delays in the delivery of goods, according to the bill of lading. International maritime conventions deal with the responsibility of the shipper, which, in comparison with international conventions, reflects the evolution of maritime transport law in recent years. Therefore, this article seeks to investigate the fact that the sender of the goods is responsible for damages resulting from delivery delays under international conventions? Under what circumstances is the bill of lading holder responsible for the demolition payment? Is there a semantic relationship between demolition payment and Incoterms?Method: The method of data collection of this article is the use of library method and the method of data analysis is analytical-descriptive.Results and Findings: There is an indirect relationship between demolition and Incoterms that the choice of any of the terms Incoterms will be effective in determining demolition and the holder of the bill of lading (the consignor) is responsible for paying the demolition if there is an explicit condition.
Manuscript profile
