Scholarlink

The Plaintiff carrier carried thirty forty-foot high cube containers (FEU HQs) containing plywood from Lianyungang, China to Jebel Ali, UAE under a Bill of Lading naming the First Defendant as shipper. The First Defendant bought the plywood that was exported from the Second Defendant; the Third Defendant made the freight forwarding arrangements. No one took delivery of the containers in Jebel Ali, so the Plaintiff incurred storage costs. It sued all three defendants, claiming container demurrage of USD633,533.48 and reimbursement of storage fees and other related costs at the port of discharge of USD1,637,378.58. The First Defendant argued that these costs should be borne by the intended receiver of the goods, as risk had passed to the receiver when the goods passed the ship’s rail at the port of loading, and the Bill of Lading had been sent to the receiver.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Yang Ming Marine Transport Co., Ltd. v. China Jiangsu International Economic and Technical Cooperation Group Co., Ltd. et al.

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Martin Davies,
  • Jiang Lin

摘要

The Plaintiff carrier carried thirty forty-foot high cube containers (FEU HQs) containing plywood from Lianyungang, China to Jebel Ali, UAE under a Bill of Lading naming the First Defendant as shipper. The First Defendant bought the plywood that was exported from the Second Defendant; the Third Defendant made the freight forwarding arrangements. No one took delivery of the containers in Jebel Ali, so the Plaintiff incurred storage costs. It sued all three defendants, claiming container demurrage of USD633,533.48 and reimbursement of storage fees and other related costs at the port of discharge of USD1,637,378.58. The First Defendant argued that these costs should be borne by the intended receiver of the goods, as risk had passed to the receiver when the goods passed the ship’s rail at the port of loading, and the Bill of Lading had been sent to the receiver.