While our American friends celebrate their nation's birthday, the rest of us remain hard at work – someone has to make sure all those fireworks and hamburgers make it safely to their destinations!

In part of a continuing trend of deregulation, the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) has announced that the antitrust protection extended to Bureaus, including the NCC (National Classification Committee) would come to an end this September. U.S. Editor Steve Block comments here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=453

Forwarders are often caught up in the question of whether they were acting as principal or agent with respect to a particular activity. But what about the question of whether or not they are a forwarder in the first place? This question can be surprisingly difficult, particularly in the US where the usage and implication of the term change depending on whether it is applied to land or ocean carriage. For the full article, click here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=450

This e-news features the two more in a series of comments by contributor Jan Ramberg and US Forwarderlaw Member Richard Gluck on the deliberations of the UNCITRAL working group earlier this year. In the first commentary, they discuss Article 89 and the applied concepts of freedom of contract for volume contracts, provisions that are not widely supported. In the second commentary, they discuss Art 1.7 and the concepts of the Maritime Performing Carrier and Maritime Performing Party. For the full articles click here:

http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=457
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=460

This e-news features three in a series of commentaries by Vlad Cioarec, Trade Consultant, on documentary provisions of the CMR. In the first, he discusses Art. 19 and the requirements under which a CMR Road Consignment Note would be acceptable as a combined transport document. In the second, he examines distinctions between multimodal, combined transport, and Port-to-Port bills. In the third, he described the legal effect of notations made on the bills with respect to the port of loading and destination, the identity of the carrying vessel, the shipment date, and the various freight charge notations. For the full commentaries, click here:

http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=454
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=456
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=459

Forwarders are often troubled by the distinction between principal and agent. But the question of agency alone can be problematic, as sometimes agents appear to act for more than one principal in the same transaction. This question became the root of a dispute when a shipper, perhaps wishing to avoid bill of lading conditions, brought suit for damages arising out of delay against the booking agent who had booked the cargo. William Fullard of South Africa comments on an interesting and easily misinterpreted decision of the South African Supreme Court of Appeals:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=455

Our new Member for New Zealand comments on an interesting decision of their courts with respect to recovery of damages under the Warsaw Convention. Air New Zealand argued, inter alia, that the Convention did not recognize freight charges as damages, and that ANZ's terms of carriage deemed freight to be earned regardless of loss or damage. The result canvassed several interesting issues, reviewed here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=458

If you would like to be removed from the mailing list hit your reply button and type in "unsubscribe" in the message. Please send this edition of Forwarderlaw E-news to a friend who would benefit from an introduction to this resource.

If you wish to send the General Editor an Article, please "telegraph" your intentions by a previous email, so that your article does not get deleted like the numerous virus-carrying emails.