Contracting Parties in the International Successive Transport

• Author: Senior Lecturer Ion Iorga, PhD in progress - Senior Lecturer Mirela Costache, PhD in progress

Senior Lecturer Ion IORGA, PhD in progress

Academia de Poliție Al. I. Cuza, Bucharest ioniorgaion@yahoo.com

Senior Lecturer Mirela COSTACHE, PhD in progress

"Danubius" University of Galati mirelacostache@univ-danubius.ro

COTIF 1980 adoptată la Berna, pentru transporturile feroviare internaționale, a fost ratificată de România prin Decretul Consiliului de Stat nr. 100/1983 şi a intrat în vigoare la 1 nov. 1985. Modificarea adusă de Protocolul din 3 iunie 1999 a fost ratificată prin O.G. Nr. 69/2001 aprobată prin Legea nr. 53/2002 (M. Of. Nr. 538/1 septembrie 2001. CMR 1956 adoptată la Geneva, pentru transporturile rutiere internaționale, a fost ratificată de România prin Decretul 451 din 6 decembrie 1972. Conventia a fost modificată prin Protocolul din 5 iulie 1978 ratificat prin Decretul nr. 66/1981

« Regulile de la Hamburg » adoptate în 1978 pentru transporturile maritime internaționale, au fost ratificate de România prin Decretul nr. 343 din 1981( Buletinul Oficial nr. 95 din 28 nov. 1981). Conventia de la Budapesta privind contractul de transport de marfă în navigatia interioară (CMNI) adoptată la 3 octombrie 2000 de reprezentantii Comisiei Dunării şi CCNR sub egida CEE- ONU a fost ratificată de Romania prin Legea nr. 494 din 18 nov. 2003., publicată în M. Of. Nr. 854 din 2 dec. 2003. Conventia semnată la 22 iunie 2001 a intrat în vigoare la data de 1 aprilie 2005, odată cu ratificarea ei de către al 5-lea stat ( Croatia) la 7 dec. 2004, în conformitate cu articolul 34. La data respectivă Conventia era ratificată de Ungaria, Romania, Elvetia şi Luxemburg Ulterior, a fost ratificată de Germania, Olanda şi Franta, ultima prin Lg. Nr.2007-300 din 5.03.2007.CMNI urmează principiile existente în alte Conventii din domeniul transporturilor cum ar fi Regulile Haga-Visby 1968 ori Hamburg 1978 sau CMR 1956, ultima reprezentând o veritabilă sursă de inspiratie. Art 27 din COTIF: "Atunci când transportatorul a încredințat, in totalitate sau in parte, executarea transportului unui transportator substituit, care isi exercita sau nu un drept ce ii revine prin contractul de transport, transportatorul rămâne, totuși, răspunzător pentru întregul transport.

---

1. The carrier and the substitute carrier

By concluding a separate contract of carriage with the actual carrier, the carrier specific bind as a sender. At the same time, he remains liable on the whole transport initially agreed with the shipper. No matter if the carrier has been designated a substitute after an empowerment of the carrier by the consignor to that effect contained in contracts. In any case, the carrier is obliged to inform the sender if entrusts implementation of transport or transport a part of a substitute carrier.Undertake as a substitute carrier to carrier, by agreement between them and the portion assigned to the consignor. By concluding the contract of carriage between the carrier and the carrier subsequently substitute the latter not only undertake directly to the carrier, but there is a delegation imperfect (Art. 1132, Civil Code 1133) whereby commitment is added to the substitute carrier carrier commitment . We are in the presence of so-called solidum obligations assumed by the two carriers, solidarity, under separate legal relationships. Solidarity is done as a passive (carrier, carter substitute), but active solidarity (shipper, carrier) compared with the characteristic performance, within the rights and obligations recognized in uniform right shipper and carrier, and the portion assigned to substitution. This analysis explains the relevant provisions on the liability of the two carriers and the substitute carrier is not required only care required by these provisions, even if the contract of carriage, the carrier would be aggravated or liability that may substitute carrier exploit all the objections which may be invoked against the carrier will transport contract.

2. Transport successive actual

Moving goods or people on a particular route can sometimes be satisfied by a single carrier with a particular means of transport (either rail or road or sea or air). Lately it can be seen clearly the proliferation of more complex operations, collectively known as successive transport. (R. & Mercadal, 1990, pp 367-384). They behave more variety, the main being the following: a) Transport of carriers successive independent of each other. In this case, each of the carriers enter into separate contracts with the client, self-reliant, the fraction of the transport route for which they bear. Therefore, each carrier works on its own, independently of one another. The immediate consequence is the fragmentation of responsibility, especially when damage can be localized in a particular point on the route. Depending on the stage of transport to which we relate to the same customer enter into legal relationships with several different carriers. Principles of relativity effects of mandatory contract and each contract will govern such contract, the fruit will separate agreements. It is irrelevant that the goods are carried by different vehicles. For each route segment will apply the appropriate legal regime of mode of transport used. "There will be no spillover from a legal regime to another." (Pomegranates & Mercadal, 1990, pp 367-368) Where damage found at the destination can not be located under the aspect of the case, the last carrier shall be liable, the rule for such damage. It can be absolved of liability if the condition that the necessary reserves for the commodity, removal of cargo from the previous carrier. In this way, the effect of inadequate performance of the relocation of cargo moving from the previous carrier. In the same way, using specific procedural means (eg. Call the guarantee of the previous carrier) could result indirectly from that carrier in successive series, the portion which occurred. b) successive transport through a broker. Features and complexity of a movement confined to the safe operations of its own goods leads potential customers to call carriers increasingly specialized intermediaries more often in order to see their interests met in this area involves a high degree of professionalization. Those whose goods will be dispatched to deal with a transportation broker providing movement of the goods at the end will conclude a contract for dispatch. This time, the commissioner of transportation is the sole contractor of the customer (the principal), pledging to ensure safe transportation of goods to his client, along the entire route. The principal and staff not directly enter into legal relationships...