| With the development of
containerization and Ro-Ro traffic unimodal transport documents have
been adapted to the new reality. Now a transport
document covering a multimodal or combined shipment
may take the form of a Bill of Lading, Road Waybill or Rail
Waybill. This diversity of documents is a source
of confusion among parties dealing with them under documentary credits.
To assist bankers and traders in understanding
these matters I address herein the features that distinguish multimodal
transport documents from unimodal transport documents. |
 |
Content:
-
Multimodal Transport Document or
Combined Transport Document?
-
Bills of Lading issued by shipping
lines: Port-to-Port Bills of Lading or Multimodal Transport Documents?
-
Notations in respect of places of
receipt and delivery
-
When is CMR road consignment note
acceptable as Combined Transport Document?
-
CIM Consignment Note for Combined
Transport: Rail Waybill or Combined Transport Document?
-
CMNI Transport Document: Inland
Waterway Transport Document or Combined Transport
Document?
-
Combined Air and Sea Transport
Documents
Question 1:
Multimodal Transport Document or
Combined Transport Document?
In European terminology, Multimodal Transport is defined as
a carriage by at least two different modes of
transport, while Combined Transport is defined as the transport of
intermodal transport units where the greater part of
the journey is made by rail, by inland waterway or by sea and the initial or
terminal journeys are made by another mode of
transport, typically road. This is the reason why although the
term "combined transport document" is no longer used anymore in Bills
of Lading since the adoption in 1992 of UNCTAD/ ICC
Rules for Multimodal Transport Documents (ICC Publication No.481), it is
used by Europeans in CIM rail consignment note or with reference to
CMR road consignment note.
Whilst a transport document covering a multimodal or
combined shipment may take the form of a Bill of
Lading, Road Waybill, Rail Waybill or an Inland Waterway Transport Document,
traders and bankers should be aware of the
differences between them.
Firstly, a Bill of Lading for a multimodal transport
shipment can be a document of title, while a land
carriage document is not such a document. Secondly, these documents are
issued subject to different liability regimes:
- Multimodal Transport Bills of Lading are issued subject
to the network liability system whereby the
existing mandatory rules governing unimodal carriage will apply when the
loss or damage to the goods occurs on that particular
mode. For example, if the container is lost overboard, the carrier's
liability will be determined in accordance with the
Hague/ Hague Visby Rules, while if the container is lost in a road
accident, the liability will be determined in accordance with the CMR
Convention. Otherwise said, if the container with the
goods is lost or damaged during the sea carriage liabilities under the
Multimodal Transport Document are the same as under a
Bill of Lading, while if that occurs during road carriage
liabilities are the same as under a CMR Consignment Note.
- Road and Rail Waybills are issued subject to the
uniform liability system whereby the same rules
apply throughout the duration of the contract whichever mode is used.
Question 2:
Bills of Lading issued
by shipping lines: Port-to-Port Bills of Lading or Multimodal Transport
Documents?
As a function of the type of service required by shipper, a
shipping line may act as a sea carrier or as a
multimodal transport operator, shipping lines use the same form of Bill of
Lading for both port-to-port shipments and multimodal
transport shipments. When a shipping line performs a FCL port/FCL depot
service it acts solely as a sea carrier for a port-to-port transport
service only. When, in addition to port-to-port
transport the shipping line also undertakes inland transport between the
place of taking in charge and the port of loading,
and between the port of discharge and the place of final destination, the
shipping line acts as a multimodal transport operator.
Neither UCP 500 nor UCP 600 distinguishes transport
documents issued by shipping lines as Port-to-Port Bills of Lading or
Multimodal Transport Bills of Lading. UCP 600 does not require that Bills of
Lading covering port-to-port shipments and multimodal transport
documents bear one name or another but to fulfill the
conditions set therein. Whether a transport document is a Port-to-Port or a
Multimodal Transport Bill of Lading depends on the
type of service required as particularized on the face of the
document. Bankers should check what notations contain the Bills of
Lading in respect of places of receipt and delivery,
as well as the vessel’s name, shipment date and freight.
Question 3:
Notations in respect
of places of receipt and delivery
One point in the check list for determining whether a Bill
of Lading issued by a shipping line is a Port-to-Port
Bill of Lading or a Multimodal Transport Bill of Lading is the notations in
respect of places of receipt and delivery. Bills of
Lading for container shipments commonly show a place of receipt and a
place of delivery in addition to ports of loading and discharge. When
these places of receipt and delivery are the same as
the stated ports of loading and discharge, e.g. as it is the case with
Container Yards and Container
Freight Stations, the Bill of Lading indicates a port-to-port shipment. When
they are different in the sense that either one or
both of these places are situated inland, then the Bill of
Lading evidences a multimodal transport.
One form of Port-to-Port Bill of Lading is the Bill of
Lading evidencing shipment of containers on board of
ships performing a feeder service. The attempt to cover this matter in UCP
500 has been a long source of confusion. For an
example in this sense see the commentaries of Peter Jones, Chris
Gillespie and Helena Kwok on art.23 of UCP 500:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=56
I am referring to the provisions of Art.23 (a) (ii) and (iii)
allowing Port-to-Port Bill of Lading to show a place
of receipt different from the port of loading, respectively a place of
delivery different from the port of discharge.
In the meantime, ICC Banking Commission came with new
opinions on the matter:
-
first in ICC R227, where said that Port-to-Port Bill of
Lading may indicate as port of loading either the
port where the goods were loaded on board the ocean vessel or the port
where the goods wereloaded on board the feeder vessel;
-
then in ICC Publication No.645 (ISBP) where said that the
port of loading stipulated in L/C may be stated in
the field headed “place of receipt”, provided there is an “on board”
notation evidencing that the goods were loaded on
the vessel at the port stated in the field headed “place of receipt”;
-
and finally in UCP 600 art.20 (a) (iii) which stipulates
that if the Port-to-Port Bill of Lading does not
indicate the port of loading stipulated in L/C as port of loading, e.g.
shows the port of loading stipulated in L/C as
“place of receipt” instead as “port of loading”, or contains the
indication “intended” or similar qualification in
relation to the port of loading, the Port-to-Port Bill of Lading
must bear an “on board” notation indicating
the date of shipment, the port of loading
and the name of vessel
on board of which the container with goods has been
loaded, e.g.
“SHIPPED ON BOARD ON 27 JANUARY 2007
PORT OF LOADING: ……………..
VESSEL NAME: ……………”
Notations in relation to vessel’s
name
Another point in the check list for determining whether a
Bill of Lading issued by a shipping line is a
Port-to-Port Bill of Lading or a Multimodal Transport Bill of Lading is the
notation referring to vessel’s name.
Whilst Art.19 of UCP 600 setting the requirements for
multimodal transport documents provides that a
Multimodal Transport Bill of Lading may contain solely the indication "intended"
or similar qualification with regard to the vessel’s
name, Art.20 of UCP 600 setting the requirements for Port-to-Port Bill of
Lading requires that Bill of Lading indicate the name of vessel on board of
which the goods have been loaded. If, however, in the
Port-to-Port Bill of Lading it is used the indication “intended
vessel” or similar qualification in relation to the name of vessel,
UCP 600 requires that Port-to-Port Bill of Lading
bear an “on board” notation indicating the date of shipment and the name of
actual vessel, as shown herein, e.g.:
“SHIPPED ON BOARD ON 27 JANUARY 2007
VESSEL NAME: …………..”
The “on board” notation does not need to be signed or
otherwise authenticated by carrier’s agent to be
acceptable under L/C.
This applies as well to the Port-to-Port Bills of Lading
presented in electronic (PDF) format. Here is what
eUCP Article e10 – Transport provides on this matter:
“If an electronic record evidencing transport does not
indicate a date of shipment or dispatch, the date of
issuance of the electronic record will be deemed to be the date of shipment
or dispatch. However, if the electronic record bears
a notation that evidences the date of shipment or dispatch, the date of the
notation will be deemed to be the date of shipment or dispatch.
A notation showing additional data
content need not be separately signed or otherwise authenticated.”
For a Port-to-Port Bill of Lading
presented in electronic (PDF) format, the “on board” notation must be
stamped or superimposed electronically.
Notations in respect of shipment date
In Port-to-Port Bill of Lading indication of shipment date
is possible in two ways:
-
Where the Bill of Lading
has pre-printed wording indicating that the goods have been loaded on
board or shipped on a named vessel,
e.g. “Shipped on board in apparent good order and
condition….” the issuance date is considered to be
the date of shipment.
-
In cases where the Bill of Lading evidences only the
receipt of goods, e.g. “Received by the Carrier
from the Shipper in apparent good order and condition …” or else does not
have pre-printed wording indicating that the goods
have been loaded on board or shipped on a named vessel, the loading on
board a named vessel need to be evidenced by an “on board” notation
indicating the shipment date. The date of the “on
board” notation is considered to be the date of shipment. In Multimodal
Transport Bill of Lading the indication of shipment
date by “on board” notation is required only when the place of
receipt is the same place as the port of loading.
Freight notations
Another point to watch for are freight notations which in
the case of a Bill of Lading covering a port-to-
port shipment consist of loading terminal handling charges, sea
freight and destination terminal handling charges,
while in the case of a Bill of Lading covering a multimodal transport
shipment include also the Inland Haulage Charges at
Origin and/or Destination. While there may be shown other
charges as well this depend on the destination country.
Question 4:
When is CMR road consignment note acceptable as Combined
Transport Document?
The CMR Convention (Convention on the Contract for the
International Carriage of Goods by Road) applies to a
contract of carriage by road if the place of taking in charge of goods by
road haulier and the designated place of delivery are
in two different states, of which at least one is a party to CMR
Convention. According to Art.2, the Convention would also apply to a
combined transport when the
road vehicle containing the goods is itself carried over part of the
journey by other mode of transport (e.g. rail, sea or
inland waterway) and the goods are not unloaded from the road vehicle.
This means that if a
road vehicle is transported on board a Ro-Ro (ferry) vessel, the CMR
Convention applies also to the sea transport. If
transported by rail, the CMR Convention would still apply. The CMR
Convention shall cease to apply only when the loading unit is
separated from lorry in which case the conventions
for sea transport (Hague- / Hague-Visby / Hamburg
Rules) or rail transport (CIM), as the case may be,
shall apply.
This matter is particularly important in Europe where
combined transport is seen as a means of shifting the
traffic off the road using rail, sea or inland waterways for the major part
of the journey. For this reason in 1997 the European
Conference of Ministers of Transport adopted Resolution No.97/6 on the
Development of Combined Transport whereby the road hauliers are
offered tax exemptions in proportion to the journeys
that such vehicles undertake by rail, sea or inland waterways in a combined
transport operation provided that they show to the competent
authority a documentary proof that the transportation
done is indeed a combined transport.
When part of the journey is made on board of a Ro-Ro vessel,
the documentary proof is to be in the form of a CMR
Consignment Note which must bear
the remark “transport to ship”
and
indicate the
intended port of loading, vessel and port of discharge.
In addition, the second original of the
Consignment Note must bear the “on board”
endorsement of the Ro-Ro vessel operator with the date
of rolling on the ship, the port of loading, the port of discharge
with the stamps of port authorities, to comply with
art.35 of the Convention.
Art.35 of the Convention provides that a successive carrier
(e.g. Ro-Ro vessel operator or a railway company)
shall be held responsible for loss or damage occurred during the time when
goods were in his
responsibility only if he has accepted the goods and the CMR consignment
note. Since the forwarders
acting as combined road/sea or road/rail transport operators are considered
first carriers under the CMR Convention they should
ensure that the name and address or stamp of all successive
carriers appears in the second original of consignment note in the
box provided.
For our discussion, the second original is not an issue
since the consignor receives only the first original
and this is the document that will be presented to the bank for payment.
Here is what art.19 of UCP 600 requires:
| |
“a transport document covering at least two different
modes of transport (multimodal or combined
transport document), however named, that … indicates the place of
dispatch, taking in charge or shipment and the
place of final destination stipulated in the credit, even if:
a. the transport document states, in addition to that
place, another place of dispatch, taking in charge
or shipment or another place of final destination, or
b. the transport document contains the indication "intended"
or similar qualification in relation to the
vessel or port of loading or port of discharge. |
|
It appears that such document would meet the requirements of
art.19 of UCP 600 and where a CMR Consignment Note
bears the remark “transport to ship” and indicates the intended port of
loading, vessel and port of discharge the Article
that applies is art.19 (Transport Document Covering at Least
Two Different Modes of Transport) rather than
art.24 that states, inter alia, the requirements for the
road transport documents.
When part of the journey is made on a rail wagon, the
documentary proof required in 1997 was CIM/UIRR Consignment Note which in
the meantime has been replaced by newly adopted CIM
Consignment Note for Combined Transport.
The option for issuance of CMR Consignment Note or CIM
Consignment Note for Combined Transport does not
depend on the second mode of transport used but rather on the type of
haulage operation: in the case of an accompanied
transport operation (when the whole lorry accompanied by the
driver is transhipped on Ro-Ro vessel or on rail wagon, as the case
may be) the proper combined transport document will
be a CMR Consignment Note to comply with Art.2 of CMR Convention cited
above, while in the case of unaccompanied transport operation (when
only the loading unit, e.g. container, is
transported) the proper combined transport document will be CIM
Consignment Note for Combined Transport.
Question 5:
CIM Consignment Note for Combined Transport: Rail Waybill or
Combined Transport Document?
CIM Rules (1999 Uniform Rules Concerning the Contract of
International Carriage of Goods by Rail (CIM)) apply
to a contract of carriage by rail if the place of taking in charge of goods
and the designated place of delivery are situated in
two different states, of which at least one is a party to CIM
Convention and the parties to the contract agree that the contract is
subject to the CIM Rules.
According to Art.1 (3) and (4), CIM Rules would also apply
to an international carriage that includes carriage
by road or inland waterway or by sea as a supplement to transfrontier
carriage by rail, if the respective carriage is
performed in addition to carriage by rail subject to a single contract of
carriage.
Following CIM Rules, The International Union of Combined
Road – Rail Transport Companies (UIRR) in Europe
adopted their own carriage conditions in a similar way as FIATA did with its
Model Rules after the adoption of UNCTAD/ ICC Rules
for Multimodal Transport Documents. For a while the
transport document used in Europe for combined rail/
road transport was CIM/ UIRR Consignment Note still
in use today. In 2006 The International Rail Transport Committee introduced
CIM Consignment Note for Combined Transport, to
facilitate the combined transport in Europe and the
electronic trade, as the new document can be processed in electronic (pdf)
format. A manual with the specimen of new transport
document is available on The International Rail Transport Committee web
site
www.cit-rail.org so the bankers and traders have
the opportunity to educate themselves. The bankers
should be aware that the new document is different from the old form of CIM
Consignment Note currently still in use. E.g. Whether
used for combined transport or for rail carriage only the date of
issuance indicated in Box 29 of the new transport document is deemed
to be the date of shipment.
In the old form of CIM Consignment Note currently still in
use, the shipment date is considered in international
banking practice the date indicated in Box 92 in the reception stamp of the
station of departure. So, the recommendations set in
2002 by ICC Banking Commission in ICC Publication
No.645 (International Standard Banking Practice (ISBP) for the Examination
of Documents under Documentary Credits) paragraph 172
for determination of shipment date in rail transport documents
need to be amended to be in accordance with
the new reality.
One benefit of CIM Consignment Note for Combined Transport
is the possibility to be used for the rail-sea
traffic covering the sea routes listed in the CIM list of maritime
and inland waterway services.
Question 6:
CMNI Transport Document: Inland Waterway Transport Document
or Combined Transport Document?
CMNI convention (the Budapest Convention on the Contract for
the Carriage of Goods by Inland Waterways (CMNI))
applies on contracts concerning the carriage of goods solely by inland
waterway but it is also applicable if the purpose of
the contract is the carriage of goods, without transshipment,
both on inland waterways and in waters where maritime regulations
apply, unless a marine bill of lading has been issued
in accordance with the maritime law applicable, or the distance to be
traveled in waters to which the maritime regulations
apply is the greater. It appears that an inland waterway
transport document issued subject to CMNI Convention (either in the
form of a consignment note or a bill of lading) can
be deemed to be a combined river/sea transport document, when it indicates a
carriage over river and sea without transshipment.
Question 7:
Combined Air and Sea Transport Documents
Another example of transport documents covering at least two
different modes of transport are those specifically
designed by the forwarders to cover air/sea container traffic between Europe
and Asia/Pacific Region via Dubai hub, typically
titled “Combined Transport Document”.
The said Combined Transport Document is issued subject to
the network liability system whereby the existing
mandatory rules governing unimodal carriage will apply when the loss or
damage to the goods occurs on that particular mode,
e.g. if the container with the goods is lost or damaged during the
carriage by air, the forwarder's liability will be determined in
accordance with Warsaw Convention, while if the
container is lost overboard during the sea carriage, the liability will be
determined in accordance with Hague-/Hague-Visby
Rules. Otherwise said, if the container with the goods is lost or
damaged during the air carriage the Combined Transport Document shall
be deemed to be an air waybill, while if that happen
during the sea carriage the Combined Transport Document shall be
deemed to be a Bill of Lading. A transport document for air-sea
shipment must have an indication describing the modes
of carriage used, e.g. AIR/SEA SHIPMENT: CARRIAGE BY
AIR FROM ZURICH TO DUBAI, THEN BY SEA TO TAIWAN
Otherwise, where the transport document evidences only
movement by air, all modes of carriage would be
deemed to be by air and thus subject to the Warsaw/ Montreal Convention.
Here is what the Warsaw Convention provides on this matter:
“Article 31 - Provisions relating to Combined Carriage
1. In the case of combined
carriage performed partly by air and partly by any other mode of carriage,
the provisions of this Convention apply only to the carriage by air,
provided that the carriage by air
falls within the terms of Article 1.”
The Montreal Convention has similar provisions in Article 38
— Combined Carriage. As regards the form and contents
of combined air/sea transport document, the form is similar to an air
waybill, except that includes boxes for Place of Delivery, for Place
of Transshipment, indications that place of loading
or destination may be either a port or airport and indication “not
negotiable unless consigned to order” used on Bills
of Lading.
Here is what the Warsaw Convention provides on this matter:
“Article 31 - Provisions relating to Combined Carriage
2. Nothing in this Convention shall prevent the parties in
the case of combined carriage from inserting
in the document of air carriage conditions relating to other modes of
carriage, provided that the
provisions of this Convention are observed as regards the carriage by
air.”
The Montreal Convention has similar provisions in Article 38
— Combined Carriage.
Conclusion: The issue with art.19 of UCP 600 (Transport
document covering at least two different modes of
transport) is not what type of documents to ask for but to use proper
wording in L/C. As I mentioned in my previous
commentary, the multimodal transport document does not have bear one
name or another but to fulfill the requirements set in art.19 of UCP
600. It may be that a Liner Bill of Lading or a CMR
Consignment Note cover a multimodal transport shipment or it may be that the
same document is used for unimodal carriage only. It
all depends on the information shown on the transport
document ….. and the wording of L/C. With the new CIM Consignment Note the
job is easier as the form designed for combined
transport is different from the form used solely for rail carriage.
It looks like the only type of unimodal transport document
yet in use is the air waybill.
|
