Примеры использования Shipper may на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Instead of terminating the contract, the shipper may require the carrier to wait until the obstacles to navigation have been removed.
When an obstacle to navigation under paragraph 2 above arises after the loading of the goods andthe start of the voyage, the shipper may terminate the contract.
The shipper may express its consent on the use of the electronic form at the time of submitting the shipping request to the carrier.
On the other hand, this requirement contradicts paragraphs 5 and 6, whereby the shipper may require the carrier to perform the contract.
Without prejudice to article 3, paragraphs 3 and 4, the shipper may not terminate the contract of carriage unless he pays the carrier, according to the latter's choice, the loading and discharge costs and.
If an obstacle to navigation under paragraph 2 above arises before the goods are loaded on board the vessel,both carrier and shipper may terminate the contract without damages being incurred.
The shipper may need to consult the manufacturer of the substance in conjunction with the competent authority for guidance on the compatibility of the substance with the portable tank materials.
By an appropriate entry in the consignment note, the shipper may, when the consignment note is issued, yield his right of disposal to the consignee.
Nevertheless, UAE courts would consider the facts and where the damages are caused due to stowing and packaging where the carrier is successful in evidencing that the stowage and packaging was carried out by the shipper andthe same was defective the shipper may be made liable for such damages as per Article 275(1)n.
Article 14: The text of paragraph 2 should be amended to read:The carrier or the shipper may agree that… is to be performed by the shipper, the documentary shipper or the consignee, after it consents to do so.
The carrier and the shipper may agree on a maximum limit for liability in the event of damage due to a delay in delivery in accordance with article 5, which may not be less than 25 per cent of the freight alone or exceed three times the freight.
Notwithstanding paragraph 1 of this article, and without prejudice to the other provisions in chapter 4 and to chapters 5 to 7,the carrier and the shipper may agree that the loading, handling, stowing or unloading of the goods is to be performed by the shipper, the documentary shipper or the consignee.
Notwithstanding article 20, the carrier and the shipper may agree that liability in the event of loss, damage or delay in delivery of a container and all the goods it contains shall be limited to a total amount of not less than 20,000 units of account.
Before the start of the voyage, with the exception of the cases mentioned in article 4,paragraphs 3 and 4, the shipper may not terminate the contract for carriage unless he pays half of the agreed freight and, if the goods have already been loaded on board, the loading and discharge costs and, if these operations have taken place outside the loading time, demurrage.
The carrier and the shipper may agree on a maximum limit for liability in the event of a delay in delivery in accordance with article 5, which may not be less than the amount of the freight alone or exceed three times this amount. The Parties may also agree that in the absence of proven damage, fixed compensation shall be due for each day of delay; this may not, however, exceed 25 per cent of the freight.
If the vessel is ready to start the voyage, the shipper may only exercise his right of termination under paragraph 1 above on condition that he pays, in addition to the charges and expenses mentioned in paragraph 1 above, the agreed freight in its entirety.
There are concerns that shippers may challenge such seizures in court.
That change was proposed in order toaddress the concern that the shipper might not always be able to give appropriate instructions to the carrier under those circumstances.
This was contested by the representative of Belgium, since the shipper might have the impression that he still had to check this situation flashpoint higher than 61° C or flammable gas.
However, if there were other claimants against whom the shipowner could invoke a limitation of liability under the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims,the consignee or the shipper might receive less than the full amount and the claim would not be fully met.
A proposal was made to include the"shipper" in draft article 52 between"the carrier" and"a performing party",because there were instances when the shipper might want a right of retention, such as when faced with the draft article 28 obligation to deliver the goods to a carrier, when the ship was in particularly bad condition.
Thus, for example, the term«shipper» signifies both the person handing over the goods for carriage and the person who makes the contract with the carrier: however, these two«shippers» may be different persons, for example under a FOB contract where the seller would hand over the goods for carriage and the buyer would make the contract with the carrier.
In some cases, a shipper might even, for entirely legitimate commercial reasons, prefer to keep its name confidential.
Similarly, the draft Convention did not affect any right that the shipper might have, under the applicable law, to obtain certain information that the carrier failed to insert in the transport document, or to rely on a certain factual assumption in the absence of information to the contrary.
It was stated that, although a variation of the contract of carriage would normally be negotiated between the parties to that contract, the contractual shipper might not always be the best person for the carrier to contact where an urgent decision had to be made in respect of the goods.
That addition, it was stated,should be sufficient to address possible concerns that exculpatory clauses to the benefit of the shipper might deprive the carrier of any redress in the event that a shipper's reckless conduct(for instance, failure to provide information as to the dangerous nature of the goods) caused injury to persons or damage to the ship or other cargo.
In light of the increasing tendency of shippers to provide lengthy and detailed technical descriptions of goods for inclusion in the transport document particularly since the use of computers had facilitated such lengthy descriptions, a proposal was made to introduce a limit as to the length, nature anddegree of detail of the information the shipper might seek to include in the transport document.
The carrier may require the shipper Replaces“consignee” August 1998.
The shipper and consignee may agree that the consignee is the controlling party;
However, these two«shippers» may be different persons, for example under a FOB contract where the seller would hand over the goods for carriage and the buyer would make the contract with the carrier.