sacquiescingthetermofB/L.ItresultsintheunanimousofexpressionofintentionhasformedbetweenthecarrierandbonafideassigneeofB/L.TheB/Lplaysaroleofcontractofcarriage,andbecomesthebasisofexercisingtherightofclaimtotheholderofB/L.Sothecarrier’sactofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/LconstitutesthebreachofcommitmentthathehadpledgetodeliverthegoodstotheassigneeofB/L.Thisiscalledbyacademiccircle“doctrineofimpliedcontract”betweenthecarrierandtheholderofB/L.Besidesthere’re“doctrineofagency”[17],“doctrineofassignmentofcontract”[18],andsoon.Injudicialpractice,intheappealcase“YuehaiElectronicLtdCompanyVBaoMacarriageLtdCompanyoftenderingBureau”inAugust27,1996,theSupremePeople’sCourtfoundthecarriershouldundertaketheresponsibilityforbreachingofcontracttomakeupforthelossofthelawfulholderofB/LbyreasonofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/L.[19]
　　b.“doctrineoftort”:OncesomepeoplemaintainedthatreleasingofgoodswithoutB/Lconstitutedthe“fundamentalbreachofcontract”inCommonLaw.Thatistosay,ifthenatureofbreachofcontractissoseriousthatviolatethefundamentalofcontract,thedelinquentpartycan’tprotecthimselfbyinvokingexceptionclausesincontract.Mr.YangLiangyi(HongKong)hasalsoadvocatedthattheactofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/Lconstitutedthefundamentalbreachofcontract,anditshouldbeappliedthesixyears’prescription.[20]Inpractice,theactofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/Lhasalsobeenregardedasfundamentalbreachofcontractbysomecourts,applyingthelawoftortdirectly.Butthetheory
　　offundamentalbreachofcontractismerelyadoctrineandhasnoprecisecriteriontoestimate.Soin1980,itwasupsettedbytheHouseofLordsinthecase“PhotoProductionLtd.V.SecuricorTransportLtd”.[21]Now,thereasonofstandingfordoctrineoftortisutinfro:TheB/Listitleofdocument.Itsdeliveryandthephysicaldeliveryofgoodsareprovidedwithequalauthenticity,andholdingtheB/Lisjustasconstructivepossessionofgoods.ThefunctioncarriedoutoftitleofdocumentofB/Liscertainlyguaranteedbythecarrier’sperformanceofobligationofdeliveringgoodswithoriginalB/L.OncethecarrierreleasesofgoodswithoutB/L,itconstitutestheinfringementoftherealrightownedbytheholderofB/L,soitbelongstotheactoftort.
　　c.“Doctrineofconcurrent”:ItadvocatestheB/Lisprovidedwithboththerealrightandcreditor’srightcharacter.NotonlycantheholderofB/Lclaimtothecarrierforrestitutionorundertakingthetortresponsibilityforcompensationfordamagesbasedontherealright’sclaim,butalsocanheclaimtothecarrierforbearingtheresponsibilityforbreachofcontractbasedonthecreditor’sclaim.[22]Thisadvocationisaccepteduniverselybytheoreticalcircle.Inthearticle《DeliverywithoutB/L》,Mr.YangLiangyiillustrateddefinitelythat:thelegalconsequenceofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/Listwopotentialresponsibilitiesthecarriershouldtake:oneofthemiscontractualresponsibility,andtheotherisencroachmentresponsibility.[23]
　　d.“Doctrineoftortexception”:It’stheviewidentifiedbythejudicialandpracticalcircle.ThemaincontentofthisviewisthatthecharacterofB/Ldeterminesthecauseofactioniscontractdispute,onlywhenthecarrierhasfraudulentconduct,thetortcanbetenable.[24]Itisbasedonthereasonthat,theB/Llegislationhasestablishedthebasicrightsanddutiesofbothshippingandgoodsparties,unlessthecarrieraddstheresponsibilitytohimself,thelegislativeprovisionswillbeincorporatedintoB/L.ThesameastheB/Lclausesagreedbytheparties,they’retheoutcomeofautonomyofwillofbothparties,sothedisputehappenedbyreasonofrelationshipoffB/Liscontractactionnottortaction.
　　ThefourdoctrinesmentionedabovearethetypicaldoctrinesabouttheresponsibilityattributionofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/L.Butinmyopinion,allofthemarepartialandnotcomprehensive.TheformofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/LisdiversifiedandB/Lpossessestheattributionofbothtitleofdocumentanddocumentofobligation.AllofthesedeterminethattheactofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/Lcannotbequalitateduniformly.Weshouldanalyzetheresponsibilityattributionlogicallyinaccordancewithconcretematters.
　　a.    IftheholderofB/Lisnotshipper:
　　(a).TheholderofB/Lcansuethecarrier:
　　Thecauseofactionone:“Breachofcontract”.ThepremisethattheholderofB/Lcansuethecarrieristheexistenceofrelationshipofcontractbetweenthem.Butallthecurrentdoctrineshavetheproblemswhichcannotbeexplained.
　　I.Doctrineoflegalprovisions:Itadvocatesthattheconsigneeentitledtotherightisbasedonthelegalprovision,andtheshipper’srightsaresuspendingwhenthecarrieracquirestherights.Sothecarrier’soutofreleasingofgoodswithoutB/Lshouldberegardedasbreachofcontractbyreasonofnotperformingthelegalprovisiondebt.[25]Buttheviewofthedoctrineviolatesthebasicpremisethattheresponsibilityofbreachofcontractisbasedonthelawfulrelationshipofcontract.
　　II.Doctrineofimpliedcontract:TheviewofthedoctrineisthattherelationshipbetweenthecarrierandtheholderofB/Lsubjecttotheshipperisanewcontractofcarriageindependenttothecontractbetweentheshipperandcarriage.It’sbasedonthelegalprovisions.Butthedoctrineneglectstheconsensusinidemofthetwoparties,andconfusesthedifferencesbetweenthecontractualdebtandthedebtoccurredbyunilateralact.
　　III.Doctrineofagency:Theviewofthedoctrineisthatthecontractofcarriageisconcludedbycarrierandconsignee,andtheshipperwhoentersintothecontractspecificlyonlyactsastheagentofconsignee.Actually,thesituationisonlyappliedfornamedB/LandFOBcontract.[26]
　　V.“Doctrineofthirdpartycontract”:It’saverypopularviewpointincurrent:whentheshipperandconsigneearenotthesameperson,theshipperconcludesthecontractofcarriageforthebenefitoftheconsignee.Butthedoctrinecannotbetenableifanalyzedcarefully.Accordingtothevalidityofcontractwhichbenefitsthethirdparty,therightsanddutiesofconsigneedependontheagreementofcarrierandshipper.Moreover,therightofconsigneeistraversedbyallthedemursthecarrierpresentstotheshipper.Thisisnotprofitabletoprotecttheinterestsofconsignee.Andit’snotinconformitywiththeprincipleoftakingdeliveryorclaimingfordamagesonlywithcleanB/L.
　　VI.“Doctrineofassignment”:ThetransferoftheB/Lmeanstheassignmentofthecontractofcarriage.Theconsigneeabsorbstherelationoftheoriginalcontractofcarriagebetweentheshipperandcarrier.Butaccordingtothetheoryofassignmentofcreditor’sright,theassignersh

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]  下一页