Примеры использования Performing parties на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Liability of maritime performing parties.
Some tentative support was expressed for a combination of the Italian andthe United States proposals with respect to the treatment of performing parties.
The reference to the performing parties should be eliminated from the provision;
Article 20 Liability of maritime performing parties.
A question was raised regarding the exclusion of performing parties in the case of trans-shipment from the definition of"maritime performing party. .
Люди также переводят
Servants and agents of the carrier and other maritime performing parties.
It was thought that inland performing parties should have the Himalaya protection granted by the contract concluded by them.
Support was expressed for limiting the scope of paragraph 6.3 to"physically" performing parties.
One concern raised with respect to the treatment in general of performing parties was the geographic reach of the draft instrument.
Support was expressed for the mandatory application of the draft instrument to maritime performing parties.
In that respect, it was pointed out that the exclusion of maritime performing parties did not mean that carriers would not be liable for the acts of these performing parties.
However, it was further suggested that some of the connecting factors contained in draft article 72 bis would not apply to maritime performing parties.
Pending issues, including issues relating to maritime performing parties(draft article 15), national law(draft article 8) and special limitations draft article 18 2.
It was also stated that the scope of application and the position of the performing parties were closely linked.
The proposal was said to include a right of suit against performing parties in this narrowed sense, such that the contract that the performing party itself concluded would apply.
That qualification was consistent with a policy decision taken by the Working Group that road carriers should generally not be equated with maritime performing parties.
This Convention applies without regard to the nationality of the vessel,the carrier, the performing parties, the shipper, the consignee, or any other interested parties. .
In addition, it was suggested that the inclusion of a reference to national law in article 26, paragraph 1 could render it impossible to use draft article 4("the Himalaya clause")to protect performing parties.
The view was expressed that separate treatment of maritime and inland performing parties would be of particular importance if mandatory national law was not included in subparagraph 4.2.1.
Some concern was expressed with respect to this narrowed definition of performing party, particularly with the Himalaya protection which, it was thought,should be available to all performing parties.
According to Article 6.3.1 of the Instrument, liability is imposed on"performing parties"- those that perform the- contractual- carrier's"core obligations" under the contract of carriage.
For these reasons, it was suggested that paragraph 6.3 and the definition of"performing party" in draft article 1 should be deleted or, in the alternative, that the definition should be clarified so as toensure that it was limited to"physically" performing parties.
The Working Group agreed that it intended that the provision should apply to all performing parties, and that retaining the reference to the"maritime performing party" was potentially confusing, and thus should be deleted.
In particular, it was indicated that reference to contractual relationships would not be appropriate in the case of maritime performing parties, for whom the contract of carriage had less relevance.
It was also stated that the treatment of performing parties was an important aspect of the issue of scope of application, andthat a distinction could be drawn between maritime performing parties and inland performing parties.
It was clarified that the language in the bracketed text in paragraph 1 of draft article 19 was intended to ensure that maritime performing parties would not be covered by the draft convention if they did not perform any of their activities in a Contracting State.
If the carrier and one ormore maritime performing parties are liable for the loss of, damage to, or delay in delivery of the goods, their liability is joint and several but only up to the limits provided for under this Convention.
Some concessions had been made: for example,a distinction had been drawn between maritime performing parties and inland performing parties without providing for direct action against an inland performing party. .
Finally, it was suggested that the reference to maritime performing parties would be necessary to ensure that the carrier would not escape liability by invoking the exclusive liability of the maritime performing parties.
However, it was suggested that if the first bracketed text,which referred only to maritime performing parties, were retained, then paragraph 4 could be deleted as it was already covered by paragraph 1 of draft article 19.