论文部分内容阅读
本文通过分析厦门海事法院审判的一起无单放货案例,表明了承运人与无船承运人“双重无单放货”的表现形式;比较了无船承运人提单与实际承运人提单的共性与区别,着重探讨了无船承运人提单也具有物权凭证的功能,在记名条件下等同于海运单,在指示提单条件下具有海运提单的功能;文章最后论证了承运人与无船承运人在“双重无单放货”下各自承担赔偿责任的依据及后果。
This article analyzes the common case of non-single goods delivery trial by Xiamen Maritime Court, which shows the manifestation of “double cargo-free delivery” by carriers and non-vessel carriers. It compares the commonality of non-vessel carrier bill of lading with actual carrier bill of lading The paper mainly discusses the function of the NVOCC bill of lading also has the document of title, which is equivalent to the sea waybill under the naming conditions and has the function of bill of lading under the condition of the bill of lading. Finally, the article demonstrates that the carrier and NVOCC The basis and consequence of their respective liability for compensation under the “double cargo-free” delivery.