جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « incoterms » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

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? 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 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.

In the contract of sale especially where the sale involves a contract of carriage of goods, this important question arises that in the case of loss or damage without fault before delivering the Sold goods, Who is responsible for damages or losses taken place in that case? Seller or buyer? Since the international trades and also internal trades for sale of goods requires special contractual forms (Incoterms rules), it is necessary to answer the above questions in relation to the rules of Incoterms.

For present study, the descriptive approach has been chosen and relevant information collected by the documentary and library method.
Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and confidentiality have been observed.

Among trade terms mentioned in Incoterms that are used for different methods of  goods carriage, the EXW, FCA, CPT, CIP, DAP, DAT and DDP  are of importance. These methods are divided to two kinds of “Delivery to Carrier” and “Deliver to Buyer”.

Contrary to domestic law which passing of risk requires delivery of goods, in Vienna convention the risk of sale is imposed on the buyer. Since in Incoterms, the carriage of goods sold is usually associated with a variety of issues and also the deviations in it can postpone the delivery of goods and delay in passing of risk delivery, Incoterms try to ban these unusual obstacles. In Iran there is no special rule about the effect of carriage contract on delivery of goods and passing of risk but it is possible to apply articles 380, 387, 567 and 349 of civil law for carriage contracts.

Farsi International Trade Law literature has traditionally translated INCOTERMS as “International Commercial Words”/ INCOWORDS. The why and how of this tradition has its root in the pathology of translation in Iran, namely the body controlling scientific translation has not been yet recognized or if recognized, could not reach to its predetermined end. Unfortunately, translation related problems are seen in the Iranian Law Texts extracted from foreign laws texts. International trade literature contains so many terms/ words, but the question is why ICC has a different look at these 11 TERMS and published many versions of INCOTERMS. TERM in English means “Word” & “Condition” and before translating, it should be cleared that if TERM in INCOTERMS means “Word”, “Condition” or both. It seems that TERM in INCOTERMS means “Word” and “Condition” as well. But the Farsi translated “International Commercial Words”/ INCOWORDS cannot transfer the meaning intended by ICC. This paper, based on some criteria of linguistics, translation and law, is aimed at establishing the fact that the Farsi equivalent used for INCOTERMS is not the right equivalent and the equivalent of “International Commercial Words”/ INCOWORDS does not cover the real intention of ICC “Conditions Abbreviations for Sale of Goods”. The Farsi writers could use at least the word “International Commercial Abbreviations”. Finally, some suggested Farsi equivalents are listed.

United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods provide as default rules. Article 6 of convention gives right to change or dismiss the convention rule to the parties. Consequently, the parties can perform articles 66-70 of convention in several kinds, they can exclude perform some rules, or exclude their effects, in this situation party express their agreement. They can perform their agreement in regard to article 6 of convention, but the question is: where this amendment result is excluding all convention rules about risk, or exclude some rules effects?
When Party agreements amendment convention rule, they can agree that international custom (so incoterms rules) perform. The next problem is: if the party doesn’t expressly agreed about performance of incoterms rules; is it Possible to perform it as part of party’s contracts? In this article we consider the effects of party about substituting convention rule with incoterms rule and at the end clear that courts know incoterms as parts of agreement when party express or don’t express it.