Dear Expert,
May I ask for your opinion of the following:
B/L bearing the chop showing the clause :
CARGO LOAD / UNLOAD, LASHED, MULTI STACKING, MODE ON STOWAGE
AND CARGO SHIPPED ON DECK AT SHIPPER’S RISK, THE CARRIER IS NOT
RESPONSIBLE FOR LOSS OR DAMAGE HOWEVER / WHATSOEVER CAUSED.
Please comment whether the discrepancy is valid or not?
For your reference:
Article 26 a. A transport document must not indicate that the goods are or will be loaded on deck. A clause on a transport document stating that the goods may be loaded on deck is acceptable.
Thank you for your assistance.
Regards,
ucp 600
shipped on deck clause
-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:56 pm
- First Name: LEUNG
- Last Name: KING SANG
- Organization: WACHOVIA BANK N.A.
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:09 pm
- First Name: malla
- Last Name: reddy
- Organization: IFTS
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
ITS DISCREPANT
Hi
its not acceptable though it shows at shipper's risk.therefore it is a clear discrepancy as per A(26).
malla
its not acceptable though it shows at shipper's risk.therefore it is a clear discrepancy as per A(26).
malla
- berry
- Posts: 329
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:36 pm
no discrepancy
i feel it like a standard clause. the line does not expressly says that the cargo is loaded on deck rather covers may other issues. its a clause not to be considered.