CMI - SINGAPORE

12.1 Rights under the contract of carriage may only be asserted against the carrier either by :

(i) the contracting shipper, or

(ii) the consignee, or

(iii) any third party to which the contracting shipper or the consignee has transferred its rights,

depending on which of the above persons is interested in the right, or

(iv) any third party which has acquired rights under the contract of carriage by legal subrogation under the applicable national law.

In case of any passing of rights as referred to under (iii) or (iv) above, the carrier is entitled to all defences and limitation of liability which are available to it under the contract of carriage and under this Instrument towards such third party.

This provision applies to any contract of carriage. A contracting shipper and a consignee can only assert those rights which belong to it and if it has a sufficient interest to claim. This means that in case of loss or damage to the goods the claimant must have suffered the loss or damage itself. If another person, e.g. the owner of the goods or an insurer is the interested party, such other person must either acquire the right of suit from the contracting shipper or from the consignee, or, when possible, assert a claim against the carrier outside the contract of carriage.

12.2 In the event that a negotiable transport document is issued, the holder is entitled to assert rights under the contract of carriage against the carrier, without having to proof that it is the party interested in these rights itself. If such holder has no interest in these rights itself, it shall be deemed to act on behalf of the person which is the interested party.

The principle that a claimant must have an interest in the claim itself, does, according to the prevailing bill of lading law and practice, not apply to the holder of a bill of lading. It has to be discussed whether the right of suit should be exclusively vested in the holder, or that these rights should also be vested in a previous holder or the contracting shipper when such person is the interested person. The draft does not provide for such exclusivity. Therefore, the second sentence is needed in order to avoid that a carrier should have to pay twice.





		12 Rights of Suit 12.1 Rights under the contract of carriage may only be asserted against the carrier either by : (i) the contracting shipper, or (ii) the consignee, or (iii) any third party to which the contracting shipper or the consignee has transferred its rights, depending on which of the above persons is interested in the right, or (iv) any third party which has acquired rights under the contract of carriage by legal subrogation under the applicable national law. In case of any passing of rights as referred to under (iii) or (iv) above, the carrier is entitled to all defences and limitation of liability which are available to it under the contract of carriage and under this Instrument towards such third party. This provision applies to any contract of carriage. A contracting shipper and a consignee can only assert those rights which belong to it and if it has a sufficient interest to claim. This means that in case of loss or damage to the goods the claimant must have suffered the loss or damage itself. If another person, e.g. the owner of the goods or an insurer is the interested party, such other person must either acquire the right of suit from the contracting shipper or from the consignee, or, when possible, assert a claim against the carrier outside the contract of carriage. 12.2 In the event that a negotiable transport document is issued, the holder is entitled to assert rights under the contract of carriage against the carrier, without having to proof that it is the party interested in these rights itself. If such holder has no interest in these rights itself, it shall be deemed to act on behalf of the person which is the interested party. The principle that a claimant must have an interest in the claim itself, does, according to the prevailing bill of lading law and practice, not apply to the holder of a bill of lading. It has to be discussed whether the right of suit should be exclusively vested in the holder, or that these rights should also be vested in a previous holder or the contracting shipper when such person is the interested person. The draft does not provide for such exclusivity. Therefore, the second sentence is needed in order to avoid that a carrier should have to pay twice.