无提单放货引起的货物索赔应适用什么时效,这是一个较复杂的问题。不仅国内司法界、学术界没有定论,国际上也做法各异。而时效适用直接关系到当事人权利义务和诉讼结果,不可不辨。目前国内较常见的做法是不适用提单上的时效而适用民法的两年时效。理由主要有两种:一种认为无单放货应追究侵权之责而不能再适用合同;另一种认为无单放货超出了海牙规则“钩到钩” It is a complicated issue that the cargo claim caused by no bill of lading should be subject to the limitation of timeliness. Not only the judiciary but also the academia in the country are not conclusive and have different approaches internationally. However, the application of prescriptions is directly related to the rights and obligations of litigants and the outcome of litigation. At present, the more common practice in China is not to apply the two-year limitation of civil law on the limitation of the bill of lading. There are two main reasons: one does not think that the release of goods should be held accountable for infringement and can no longer apply the contract; another kind of non-delivery of goods beyond the Hague Rules “hook to the hook”