|
一、論提單 提單這個(gè)議題有點(diǎn)老生常談，因?yàn)槭忻嫔嫌懻撎釂蔚臅?、論文太多了，筆者的專書就有「載貨證券」、「物流單證與國際運(yùn)輸法規(guī)釋義」、「運(yùn)輸單證與運(yùn)送責(zé)任－鹿特丹規(guī)則的影響」、「鹿特丹規(guī)則與單證托運(yùn)人」等，加上探討提單的論文；記名提單，提單與海運(yùn)單的轉(zhuǎn)讓、提單種類等，類似的討論市面上更是多得不可計(jì)數(shù)。 如果班輪運(yùn)輸是海商法的重心，則提單就是其中的重中之重；一份提單中，可依提單的抬頭(headline)、承運(yùn)人地址之簽字，找出負(fù)運(yùn)輸責(zé)任的當(dāng)事人。收貨與交貨地點(diǎn)證明提單之運(yùn)送責(zé)任起迄地點(diǎn)，提單標(biāo)頭也區(qū)別出是海運(yùn)提單(portto port B/L)或多式聯(lián)運(yùn)提單(multi-modal transport B/L)。裝貨港與卸貨港是海運(yùn)履約方負(fù)責(zé)任范圍。適用哪個(gè)公約或哪國法規(guī)[1]，則要看提單背面的首要條款(Paramount Clause)怎么書寫。提單是運(yùn)輸合同之證明，1924的海牙規(guī)則、1968的威士比規(guī)則、1978的漢堡規(guī)則、甚至2008的鹿特丹規(guī)則，都要依提單首要條款怎么印刷，決定是不是能適用于這份提單所代表的航程責(zé)任。這個(gè)決定未必要等待公約生效[2]，也不論是否為締約國，更不待海商法是否參照納入，或者首要條款印刷的是不是相關(guān)當(dāng)事人所在國家的國內(nèi)法[3]。商事行為引導(dǎo)法律的適用、以商領(lǐng)法或以商領(lǐng)政，提單可真是獨(dú)一無二的證明。 海商法或國際公約不論運(yùn)輸合同、運(yùn)輸單證或提單，中文「提單」兩字，可說運(yùn)輸單證的統(tǒng)合稱呼，陸運(yùn)的提貨單、貨物收據(jù)，鐵路公約的委托單(consignor note)，海運(yùn)的載貨證券(bill of lading)、空運(yùn)提單(airway bill)，以及海運(yùn)仿空運(yùn)的海運(yùn)單(seaway bill)，提單兩字幾都可以涵括。海運(yùn)貨物運(yùn)送單證歷經(jīng)國際公約的演變，海運(yùn)單、運(yùn)輸單證、電子運(yùn)輸紀(jì)錄、電子提單等名詞陸續(xù)加入，但提單一詞歷史最久，也最普及，為說明之方便，本文以下便以提單一詞，做綜合說明。 二、國際貨物海運(yùn)公約與提單 國際貨物海運(yùn)公約基本上幾都是以提單為基底，海牙規(guī)則英文全名是以統(tǒng)一提單有關(guān)法規(guī)的國際公約(International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Lawrelating to Bills of Lading)，海牙威士比規(guī)則包括海牙的舊規(guī)定、威士比修正案、布魯塞爾議定書三個(gè)部分，全稱修正統(tǒng)一提單有關(guān)法規(guī)的國際議定書(Protocol to Amend the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading)與海牙規(guī)則幾都一樣，兩者為討論之方便，多稱海牙系列(Hague System)。兩公約都以統(tǒng)一「提單」的國際規(guī)范作為公約訂定之目的。漢堡規(guī)則改以海運(yùn)貨物之聯(lián)合國公約(United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea)名之，就因如此，在第一條名詞定義中，除了定義「運(yùn)輸合同」(contract of carriage by sea)之外，另外再定義「提單」(bill of lading)。這點(diǎn)是因?yàn)楹Ｑ老盗幸?guī)則因名稱以提單為標(biāo)題，名詞定義就不再定義提單。代表海運(yùn)提單在海運(yùn)貨物公約中的重要性；漢堡規(guī)則定義之提單，是運(yùn)輸合同的證明，也是承運(yùn)人收、裝貨(taking over or loading)、(裝貨港)交貨(to deliver)，以及依提單規(guī)定交貨給記名者指示的人(to the order of a named person)、待指示的人(to order)、持有人(to bearer)等，構(gòu)成提單之運(yùn)作(constitutes such an undertaking)。使提單意義在漢堡規(guī)則中反有更清楚的表明。 提單自海牙系列公約內(nèi)，以及之后的漢堡規(guī)則，一直是代表貨物運(yùn)輸合同的證明[4](evidence of contract)。鹿特丹規(guī)則更在定稿前在名稱上加上合同(on contract)兩字[5]，使全稱以「全部或部分途程本于合同之國際貨物運(yùn)送聯(lián)合國公約」(United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea)，名稱與漢堡規(guī)則類似，冠上聯(lián)合國字樣。目前多式聯(lián)運(yùn)之盛行，卻必須仍為以合同為基礎(chǔ)。這也表示所有公約的基礎(chǔ)，仍是運(yùn)輸合同。鑒于班輪運(yùn)送除了批量，通常不簽合同，唯一以合同型態(tài)展現(xiàn)的，唯有海運(yùn)提單，提單于班輪運(yùn)送、于國際公約的意義及價(jià)值。在此表達(dá)無疑。 班輪裝貨須簽提單，租船也簽提單[6]，不論班輪提單，或租船提單，提單簽發(fā)人就是承運(yùn)人[7]。也就是說，無論為租船或自有船，無論船東或承租人簽提單，簽單人就是承運(yùn)人[8]。簡(jiǎn)單講不論班輪或租船，就提單負(fù)運(yùn)送責(zé)任的人只看其是否簽單，而不論在哪種身分或哪種情形下簽單。鹿特丹規(guī)則之前，提單的第一位持有人是托運(yùn)人，身分通常是買賣合同的賣方、發(fā)貨人或供貨商(supplier)，其托運(yùn)人身分填寫在提單托運(yùn)人字段上，也就是與承運(yùn)人對(duì)應(yīng)的提單當(dāng)事人。鹿特丹規(guī)則為免在船上交貨(free on board, FOB)貿(mào)易條件下，傳統(tǒng)出口商不是決定船運(yùn)的人，卻因擔(dān)任當(dāng)然的托運(yùn)人，背負(fù)太多對(duì)于貨物運(yùn)輸?shù)呢?zé)任，而增加單證托運(yùn)人一詞[9]，使船上交貨條件的賣方、發(fā)貨人、供貨商，以單證托運(yùn)人(documentary shipper)身分記載于提單，也就是單證上出現(xiàn)的托運(yùn)人，而不是真正的托運(yùn)人。真正的托運(yùn)人是貿(mào)易條件上訂定運(yùn)輸合同的人，是決定船運(yùn)的人、就提單負(fù)責(zé)的當(dāng)事人，也是首當(dāng)其沖負(fù)提單責(zé)任的人[10]。這個(gè)改變使亞洲、尤其兩岸影響很大，由于大部分出口貨物類別，使亞洲區(qū)的貿(mào)易條件大多(臺(tái)灣是八成)以類船上交貨(FOB)的條件成交，買方?jīng)Q定船運(yùn)，使買方成為托運(yùn)人，出口商只是單證托運(yùn)人。只見其害，未見其利的結(jié)果，造成短時(shí)間的恐慌。但這個(gè)改變也使大家感受鹿特丹規(guī)則立法技術(shù)之神奇，因?yàn)橥羞\(yùn)人的文字沒變，意義卻不同于以往。在船上交貨FOB)貿(mào)易條件下，甚至意義相反。但托運(yùn)人是提單全程的貨方當(dāng)事人這點(diǎn)不變，單證托運(yùn)人的責(zé)任次于托運(yùn)人的立場(chǎng)也已在鹿特丹規(guī)則上標(biāo)明[11]。 提單的轉(zhuǎn)讓，海牙、海牙威士比與漢堡、鹿特丹規(guī)則倒是相同，持有人隨提單之轉(zhuǎn)讓，使銀行、保方、受貨人，在轉(zhuǎn)讓過程中階段性持有提單，亦須各在該持有階段，負(fù)貨方之責(zé)任，而決定船運(yùn)的第一位托運(yùn)人，在階段托運(yùn)人，包括單證托運(yùn)人不負(fù)責(zé)任時(shí)，必須承擔(dān)責(zé)任，這是第一位托運(yùn)人權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓、責(zé)任與義務(wù)無法轉(zhuǎn)讓的事實(shí)。 提單因只有承運(yùn)人單方簽字；不論是船東、承租人、無船承運(yùn)人，承運(yùn)人因簽發(fā)提單，使提單只能是合同證明，而不是合同。這部分除海牙規(guī)則，此后公約也都維持這些傳統(tǒng)，沒有改變。 三、提單所證明的合同 國際公約向以合同的證明說提單，雖然租船合同是最正式的合同，租船合同卻一直以來被排除在適用范圍之外[12]，鹿特丹規(guī)則對(duì)這點(diǎn)說得更徹底，排除租船合同之外，還排除其他以船舶或艙位租用為目的的合同(contracts for the use of a ship or of any space)[13]。因此提單所代表的合同只剩一種，就是班輪貨運(yùn)的合同了。對(duì)于鹿特丹新增的班輪批量合同，鹿特丹第80條批量合同的特別規(guī)定(Special rules for volume contracts)里，特別說明公約適用的批量合同，「可訂定較公約規(guī)定更大或更小的權(quán)利、義務(wù)及責(zé)任」[14]，等于批量合同雖明文適用公約，實(shí)際上卻允許批量合同可以公約適用范圍以外的條件洽定，這個(gè)自由洽定的規(guī)定。實(shí)際上也等于是把批量合同排除在適用范圍之外了。 排除租船合同、排除批量合同，范圍縮小之后，提單證明之合同，可明言僅為每份提單所代表的包裝貨(package cargo)的單位運(yùn)輸合同，這些合同可以各種形態(tài)出現(xiàn)，如諾成合同，也就是民法中的口頭承諾的合同、也就是事前的電話或電報(bào)約定。也可能由一種非屬任何格式的類別；運(yùn)費(fèi)協(xié)定(freight contracts )、大副簽收單(mate’s receipts )、不可轉(zhuǎn)讓之收據(jù)(non-negotiable receipts )、海運(yùn)單(seaway bills)及轉(zhuǎn)運(yùn)單證(through transportation documents)[15]等。而提單之簽發(fā)，也使這些之前簽立的合同，綜合在提單這份單證里了[16]。 考諸實(shí)際，提單字段只填寫裝貨港與目的港，不填寫收貨地點(diǎn)(place of receipt)與交貨地點(diǎn)(place of delivery)的，大多代表的就是散裝貨運(yùn)輸合同，或是租船提單(charter party B/L)，或許非貨柜船載運(yùn)之雜貨(general cargo)運(yùn)輸合同。除了裝貨港與目的港之外，提單字段填寫了收貨與交貨地點(diǎn)的，就是目前常見的貨柜運(yùn)送多式聯(lián)運(yùn)合同。這種情形下，海商法需要不需要就多式聯(lián)運(yùn)合同作特別說明？需要不需要特別界定承運(yùn)人？或者多式聯(lián)運(yùn)經(jīng)營人？答案可說十分清楚。而承運(yùn)人的責(zé)任范圍，只要根據(jù)提單，就能看出責(zé)任范圍；簽發(fā)單證為責(zé)任之始，收回單證則是責(zé)任之止。貨物送到內(nèi)陸，交貨給受貨人，收回提單，責(zé)任就到交貨時(shí)為止，劃分可說十分清楚。 四、班輪提單與租船提單 班輪運(yùn)送最重要的部分就是提單(運(yùn)輸單證)，貨物運(yùn)送的相關(guān)規(guī)定由提單證明之，這是當(dāng)運(yùn)輸合同沒有書面，或者運(yùn)輸合同零散出現(xiàn)在陸續(xù)船期通知等不具書面效力文件中的情形，因而需要提單做個(gè)總結(jié)[17]。以CGM CMA的格式條文為例，說「貨方同意所有與這批貨物運(yùn)送相關(guān)的之前協(xié)議、運(yùn)費(fèi)協(xié)議等，均因本提單之簽發(fā)而停止運(yùn)作，包括之前貨方與承運(yùn)人、其代理人、次合同人、其受雇人、其船長(zhǎng)或其船舶所約訂之任何協(xié)定亦然」(that all agreements or freight engagements for and in connection with the carriage of the Goods are superseded by the Bill of Lading, including any previous engagements between the Merchant and the Carrier, its agents, Subcontractors,employees, captains or vessels.)，代表提單就是唯一的合同決定性單證。 但如果提單代表的是租船合同，情況便大有不同，以波羅地海國際海運(yùn)同盟(The Baltic and International Maritime Council)之標(biāo)準(zhǔn)型(Uniform General Charter)定型化國際租船提單(charter party B/L)[18]為例，這類提單其上必印有「雙方同意應(yīng)依租船合同履行」(It is mutually agreed that this contract shall be performed subject to the conditions contained in this Charter Party……)[19]，提單不是之前所說的運(yùn)輸合同的總結(jié)，反是提單與租船合同沖突，以租船合同為準(zhǔn)，而非以提單為準(zhǔn)。僅提單當(dāng)事人不是承租人，即提單轉(zhuǎn)讓過程租船合同之外的其他持有人，提單是唯一之合同證明，這點(diǎn)漢堡規(guī)則說得最清楚[20]；提單依租船合同簽發(fā)，如關(guān)系介于承運(yùn)人與提單持有人、非承租人間時(shí)，公約規(guī)定適用提單(…bill of lading isissued pursuant to a charter-party, the provisions of the Convention apply to such a bill of lading if it governs the relation between the carrier and the holder of the bill of lading not being the Charterer.)，海牙系列公約亦有類似文字[21]。因此租船提單介于船方與非租船合同關(guān)系人之其他持有人間，提單與該租船合同提單代表之某次航程提單之權(quán)利、義務(wù)、責(zé)任依然以提單為本。 五、結(jié)論－海商法的海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同該怎么設(shè)計(jì) 任何一張?zhí)釂味伎烧f是一個(gè)縮小版的單位貨物運(yùn)輸合同，從提單里可找到為該批貨物負(fù)運(yùn)送責(zé)任的人、發(fā)單時(shí)貨方代表，也就是貨方的總負(fù)責(zé)人。運(yùn)送責(zé)任的起始與終止地點(diǎn)是運(yùn)送責(zé)任范圍、海運(yùn)履約方的負(fù)責(zé)范圍則是兩港港區(qū)、并由責(zé)任范圍劃定提單代表的是多式聯(lián)運(yùn)責(zé)任或港到港責(zé)任。提單適用哪個(gè)公約或那個(gè)國內(nèi)法，也可在提單內(nèi)找到答案。 依此，海商法的承運(yùn)人責(zé)任與義務(wù)、托運(yùn)人責(zé)任、貨物交付等之規(guī)定，均屬法律強(qiáng)制承運(yùn)人該負(fù)的基本責(zé)任、基本義務(wù)與可享的基本權(quán)利。提單正、背面有低于該基本責(zé)任、義務(wù)之條款無效，高于該基本權(quán)利之條款亦無效[22]。等于默示只能容許高于該基本責(zé)任、義務(wù)之條款、低于該基本權(quán)利之條款方為有效。至于多式聯(lián)運(yùn)經(jīng)營人則應(yīng)回歸承運(yùn)人一個(gè)名詞；提單證明的合同是多式聯(lián)運(yùn)，承運(yùn)人自然就是多式聯(lián)運(yùn)經(jīng)營人。提單證明的合同是港到港，自然承運(yùn)人的責(zé)任依然只有港到港之間。 海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同章應(yīng)該排除論程，不能把公約強(qiáng)制規(guī)定與合同的任意規(guī)定擺在一個(gè)章節(jié)，雖然論程租船合同特別說明尊重合同規(guī)定，兩者并存一章依然格格不入。 基于以上分析，提單雖為合同之證明，惟班輪運(yùn)送的提單與依租船合同簽發(fā)之提單，性質(zhì)與地位卻不相同。班輪為海商法之核心，提單又是班輪運(yùn)送重中之重，則海商法海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同章不納入運(yùn)送單證或提單節(jié)，似乎說不過去。租船提單又與班輪提單不同；性質(zhì)不同，地位不同、意義也有差異，因此便有提單獨(dú)立一章的考慮，以解決這個(gè)問題。 班輪提單種類與各種單證的性質(zhì)較復(fù)雜，班輪提單大多轉(zhuǎn)讓，租船提單則多為港到港提單(ocean B/L or port to port B/L)，轉(zhuǎn)讓過程少，關(guān)系人也較單純。班輪提單是總結(jié)所有運(yùn)輸合同的單證，租船提單則以租船合同為尊，除非在非承租人持有，始有提單之功能性，因此或也可以海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同章的提單與租船合同章的提單分開規(guī)定。更簡(jiǎn)易的做法，是租船合同章除了做三種租船合同定義及定位外，亦訂定租船提單；闡明提單在租船合同下之定位與意義，則海商法這個(gè)部分的修訂或許更為完整。 [1]由于美國海上貨物運(yùn)送法(carriage of goods by sea, 1936)之強(qiáng)制適用，美國航線之提單背面首要條款便有航經(jīng)美國須適用美國海上貨物運(yùn)送法之印刷條款。 [2]一般說到鹿特丹之強(qiáng)迫適用就是這個(gè)意思；貿(mào)易相對(duì)國適用，則因迫于貿(mào)易現(xiàn)實(shí)而適用。 [3]以往臺(tái)灣有承運(yùn)人提單背面首要條款印刷以日本海商法作為首要條款的。 [4]Article 1, (b),“ “Contract of carriage' applies only to contracts of carriage covered by a bill of lading or any similardocument of title, in so far as such document relates to the carriage of goodsby sea,..” of Hague Rules, Article 1 (b), “'Contract of carriage' appliesonly to contracts of carriage covered by a bill of lading or anysimilar document of title, in so far as such document relates to the carriageof goods by sea,…”, of Hague-visby Rules &Article 1, 7, “ 'Bill oflading' means a document which evidences a contract of carriage by seaand….” of Hamburg Rules. [5]全名United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea。 [6]Article 1,(b) 'Contract of carriage' applies only … covered by a bill of lading….including any bill of lading or…. issued under or pursuant to a charter party” of Hague Rules. [7] Article 1, (a) 'Carrier' includes….who enters into a contract of carriage with a shipper.” of Hague Rules. &(b) 'Contract of carriage' applies only ….covered by a bill of ladingor….” of Hague Rules. [8] Article 1,” (a) 'Carrier'includes the owner or the charterer who enters into a contract of carriage with a shipper.” & (b) 'Contract of carriage' ….covered by a bill oflading or…so far as…relates to the carriage of goods by sea, including any billof lading or ….issued under or pursuant to a charter party from the moment ….regulates the relations between a carrier and a holder of the same.” of Hague Rules. [9]Alexander von Ziegler, Johan Schelin,Stefano Zunarelli(以上作者為鹿特丹的擬稿人，書頁XX foreword by Editors), The Rotterdam Rules 2008, Commentary to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, 7. Obligations of the Shipper to the Carrier(by Johan Schelin) , Published by Kluwer LawInternational, p.158. [10]同上注，單證托運(yùn)人次之，p.159。 [11]Article 33,2 of Rotterdam Rules. [12]Article 5 ”The provisions of this Convention shall not be applicable to charter parties ….” of Hague Rules, Article V “The provisions of these Rules shall not be applicable to charter parties, but if….” of Visby amendments, & Article 2(scope of application),3 “3. The provisions of this Convention are not applicable to charter-parties. However, where…” of Hamburg Rules. [13] Article 6(specific exclusions),” 1. This Convention does not apply to the following contracts in liner transportation  a)Charter parties; and (b)Other contracts for the use of a ship or of any space thereon.” of Rotterdam Rules.[14] Article 81, 1” 1….., as between the carrierand the shipper, a volume contract to which this Convention applies may provide for greater or lesser rights, obligations and liabilities than those imposed by this Convention.” of Rotterdam Rules. [15]原文”Depending on the manner in which the shipis employed, the contract of affreightment may be contained in a charterparty or contained in, or evidenced by, a bill of lading. But the classical division into charterparties and bills of lading is not exhaustive. Contracts of affreightment may be contained in or evidenced by documents which do not strictly fall into either category: e.g. freight contracts, mate’s receipts,non-negotiable receipts, sea waybills, ship’s delivery order, and through transportation documents.”，參Bernard Eder et al, Scrutton on Charterparties and Bills of Lading, 22nd edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2011,para.1-001. [16]參CMA CGM B/L Clause 3. (REMITTANCE ANDACCEPTANCE OF THE BILL OF LADING)'….In accepting this Bill of Lading, the Merchant agrees to be bound by all stipulation,…. face and back hereof, whetherwritten, typed, stamped or printed,…. , and agrees that all agreements or freight engagements for and in connection with the carriage of the Goods are superseded by the Bill of Lading, including any previous engagements between the Merchant and the Carrier, its agents, Subcontractors, employees, captainsor vessels.” [17]提單中常見之印刷文字，如”THE RECEIPT. CUSTODY, CARRIAGE AND DELIVERY OF THEGOODS ARE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS APPEARING ON THE FACE AND BACK HEREOF AND TOCARRIER’S APPLICABLE TARIFF”(Maersk Line B/L) 或者'….In accepting this Bill of Lading, the Merchant agrees to be bound by all stipulation,…. face and back hereof, whether written, typed, stamped or printed,…. , and agrees that all agreements or freight engagements for and in connection with the carriage of the Goods are superseded by the Bill of Lading, including any previous engagements between the Merchant and the Carrier, its agents,Subcontractors, employees, captains or vessels.”(CMA CGM B/L Clause 3.REMITTANCE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE BILL OF LADING) [18]Code name: GENCON B/L。 [19]同上注，page 1.。 [20]Article 2(scope of application),3. “The provisions of this Convention are not applicable to charter-parties. However, where a bill of lading is issued pursuant to a charter-party, the provisions of the Convention apply to such a bill of lading if it governs the relation between the carrier and the holder of the bill of lading, not being the charterer.” of Hamburg Rules. [21]Article 1,(b) & Article 5 of Hague Rules, Article 1,(b) & Article V of Visby Amendments. [22] Article 5 “A carrier shall be at liberty to surrender in whole or in part all or any of his rights and immunities or to increase any of his responsibilities and obligations under this Convention,provided such surrender or increase shall be embodied in the bill of lading issued to the shipper.” of Hague Rules. &Article V “A carrier shall be at liberty to surrender in whole or in part all or any of his rights and immunities or to increase any of his responsibilities and obligations under these Rules, provided such surrender or increase shall be embodied in the bill of lading issued to the shipper. The provisions of these Rules shall not be applicable to charter parties, but if bills of lading are issued in the case of a ship under a charter party they shall comply with the terms of these Rules….. of Visby Amendments. 來源： 海商法研究中心 王肖卿 一、論提單 提單這個(gè)議題有點(diǎn)老生常談，因?yàn)槭忻嫔嫌懻撎釂蔚臅?、論文太多了，筆者的專書就有「載貨證券」、「物流單證與國際運(yùn)輸法規(guī)釋義」、「運(yùn)輸單證與運(yùn)送責(zé)任－鹿特丹規(guī)則的影響」、「鹿特丹規(guī)則與單證托運(yùn)人」等，加上探討提單的論文；記名提單，提單與海運(yùn)單的轉(zhuǎn)讓、提單種類等，類似的討論市面上更是多得不可計(jì)數(shù)。 如果班輪運(yùn)輸是海商法的重心，則提單就是其中的重中之重；一份提單中，可依提單的抬頭(headline)、承運(yùn)人地址之簽字，找出負(fù)運(yùn)輸責(zé)任的當(dāng)事人。收貨與交貨地點(diǎn)證明提單之運(yùn)送責(zé)任起迄地點(diǎn)，提單標(biāo)頭也區(qū)別出是海運(yùn)提單(portto port B/L)或多式聯(lián)運(yùn)提單(multi-modal transport B/L)。裝貨港與卸貨港是海運(yùn)履約方負(fù)責(zé)任范圍。適用哪個(gè)公約或哪國法規(guī)[1]，則要看提單背面的首要條款(Paramount Clause)怎么書寫。提單是運(yùn)輸合同之證明，1924的海牙規(guī)則、1968的威士比規(guī)則、1978的漢堡規(guī)則、甚至2008的鹿特丹規(guī)則，都要依提單首要條款怎么印刷，決定是不是能適用于這份提單所代表的航程責(zé)任。這個(gè)決定未必要等待公約生效[2]，也不論是否為締約國，更不待海商法是否參照納入，或者首要條款印刷的是不是相關(guān)當(dāng)事人所在國家的國內(nèi)法[3]。商事行為引導(dǎo)法律的適用、以商領(lǐng)法或以商領(lǐng)政，提單可真是獨(dú)一無二的證明。 海商法或國際公約不論運(yùn)輸合同、運(yùn)輸單證或提單，中文「提單」兩字，可說運(yùn)輸單證的統(tǒng)合稱呼，陸運(yùn)的提貨單、貨物收據(jù)，鐵路公約的委托單(consignor note)，海運(yùn)的載貨證券(bill of lading)、空運(yùn)提單(airway bill)，以及海運(yùn)仿空運(yùn)的海運(yùn)單(seaway bill)，提單兩字幾都可以涵括。海運(yùn)貨物運(yùn)送單證歷經(jīng)國際公約的演變，海運(yùn)單、運(yùn)輸單證、電子運(yùn)輸紀(jì)錄、電子提單等名詞陸續(xù)加入，但提單一詞歷史最久，也最普及，為說明之方便，本文以下便以提單一詞，做綜合說明。 二、國際貨物海運(yùn)公約與提單 國際貨物海運(yùn)公約基本上幾都是以提單為基底，海牙規(guī)則英文全名是以統(tǒng)一提單有關(guān)法規(guī)的國際公約(International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Lawrelating to Bills of Lading)，海牙威士比規(guī)則包括海牙的舊規(guī)定、威士比修正案、布魯塞爾議定書三個(gè)部分，全稱修正統(tǒng)一提單有關(guān)法規(guī)的國際議定書(Protocol to Amend the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading)與海牙規(guī)則幾都一樣，兩者為討論之方便，多稱海牙系列(Hague System)。兩公約都以統(tǒng)一「提單」的國際規(guī)范作為公約訂定之目的。漢堡規(guī)則改以海運(yùn)貨物之聯(lián)合國公約(United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea)名之，就因如此，在第一條名詞定義中，除了定義「運(yùn)輸合同」(contract of carriage by sea)之外，另外再定義「提單」(bill of lading)。這點(diǎn)是因?yàn)楹Ｑ老盗幸?guī)則因名稱以提單為標(biāo)題，名詞定義就不再定義提單。代表海運(yùn)提單在海運(yùn)貨物公約中的重要性；漢堡規(guī)則定義之提單，是運(yùn)輸合同的證明，也是承運(yùn)人收、裝貨(taking over or loading)、(裝貨港)交貨(to deliver)，以及依提單規(guī)定交貨給記名者指示的人(to the order of a named person)、待指示的人(to order)、持有人(to bearer)等，構(gòu)成提單之運(yùn)作(constitutes such an undertaking)。使提單意義在漢堡規(guī)則中反有更清楚的表明。 提單自海牙系列公約內(nèi)，以及之后的漢堡規(guī)則，一直是代表貨物運(yùn)輸合同的證明[4](evidence of contract)。鹿特丹規(guī)則更在定稿前在名稱上加上合同(on contract)兩字[5]，使全稱以「全部或部分途程本于合同之國際貨物運(yùn)送聯(lián)合國公約」(United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea)，名稱與漢堡規(guī)則類似，冠上聯(lián)合國字樣。目前多式聯(lián)運(yùn)之盛行，卻必須仍為以合同為基礎(chǔ)。這也表示所有公約的基礎(chǔ)，仍是運(yùn)輸合同。鑒于班輪運(yùn)送除了批量，通常不簽合同，唯一以合同型態(tài)展現(xiàn)的，唯有海運(yùn)提單，提單于班輪運(yùn)送、于國際公約的意義及價(jià)值。在此表達(dá)無疑。 班輪裝貨須簽提單，租船也簽提單[6]，不論班輪提單，或租船提單，提單簽發(fā)人就是承運(yùn)人[7]。也就是說，無論為租船或自有船，無論船東或承租人簽提單，簽單人就是承運(yùn)人[8]。簡(jiǎn)單講不論班輪或租船，就提單負(fù)運(yùn)送責(zé)任的人只看其是否簽單，而不論在哪種身分或哪種情形下簽單。鹿特丹規(guī)則之前，提單的第一位持有人是托運(yùn)人，身分通常是買賣合同的賣方、發(fā)貨人或供貨商(supplier)，其托運(yùn)人身分填寫在提單托運(yùn)人字段上，也就是與承運(yùn)人對(duì)應(yīng)的提單當(dāng)事人。鹿特丹規(guī)則為免在船上交貨(free on board, FOB)貿(mào)易條件下，傳統(tǒng)出口商不是決定船運(yùn)的人，卻因擔(dān)任當(dāng)然的托運(yùn)人，背負(fù)太多對(duì)于貨物運(yùn)輸?shù)呢?zé)任，而增加單證托運(yùn)人一詞[9]，使船上交貨條件的賣方、發(fā)貨人、供貨商，以單證托運(yùn)人(documentary shipper)身分記載于提單，也就是單證上出現(xiàn)的托運(yùn)人，而不是真正的托運(yùn)人。真正的托運(yùn)人是貿(mào)易條件上訂定運(yùn)輸合同的人，是決定船運(yùn)的人、就提單負(fù)責(zé)的當(dāng)事人，也是首當(dāng)其沖負(fù)提單責(zé)任的人[10]。這個(gè)改變使亞洲、尤其兩岸影響很大，由于大部分出口貨物類別，使亞洲區(qū)的貿(mào)易條件大多(臺(tái)灣是八成)以類船上交貨(FOB)的條件成交，買方?jīng)Q定船運(yùn)，使買方成為托運(yùn)人，出口商只是單證托運(yùn)人。只見其害，未見其利的結(jié)果，造成短時(shí)間的恐慌。但這個(gè)改變也使大家感受鹿特丹規(guī)則立法技術(shù)之神奇，因?yàn)橥羞\(yùn)人的文字沒變，意義卻不同于以往。在船上交貨FOB)貿(mào)易條件下，甚至意義相反。但托運(yùn)人是提單全程的貨方當(dāng)事人這點(diǎn)不變，單證托運(yùn)人的責(zé)任次于托運(yùn)人的立場(chǎng)也已在鹿特丹規(guī)則上標(biāo)明[11]。 提單的轉(zhuǎn)讓，海牙、海牙威士比與漢堡、鹿特丹規(guī)則倒是相同，持有人隨提單之轉(zhuǎn)讓，使銀行、保方、受貨人，在轉(zhuǎn)讓過程中階段性持有提單，亦須各在該持有階段，負(fù)貨方之責(zé)任，而決定船運(yùn)的第一位托運(yùn)人，在階段托運(yùn)人，包括單證托運(yùn)人不負(fù)責(zé)任時(shí)，必須承擔(dān)責(zé)任，這是第一位托運(yùn)人權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)讓、責(zé)任與義務(wù)無法轉(zhuǎn)讓的事實(shí)。 提單因只有承運(yùn)人單方簽字；不論是船東、承租人、無船承運(yùn)人，承運(yùn)人因簽發(fā)提單，使提單只能是合同證明，而不是合同。這部分除海牙規(guī)則，此后公約也都維持這些傳統(tǒng)，沒有改變。 三、提單所證明的合同 國際公約向以合同的證明說提單，雖然租船合同是最正式的合同，租船合同卻一直以來被排除在適用范圍之外[12]，鹿特丹規(guī)則對(duì)這點(diǎn)說得更徹底，排除租船合同之外，還排除其他以船舶或艙位租用為目的的合同(contracts for the use of a ship or of any space)[13]。因此提單所代表的合同只剩一種，就是班輪貨運(yùn)的合同了。對(duì)于鹿特丹新增的班輪批量合同，鹿特丹第80條批量合同的特別規(guī)定(Special rules for volume contracts)里，特別說明公約適用的批量合同，「可訂定較公約規(guī)定更大或更小的權(quán)利、義務(wù)及責(zé)任」[14]，等于批量合同雖明文適用公約，實(shí)際上卻允許批量合同可以公約適用范圍以外的條件洽定，這個(gè)自由洽定的規(guī)定。實(shí)際上也等于是把批量合同排除在適用范圍之外了。 排除租船合同、排除批量合同，范圍縮小之后，提單證明之合同，可明言僅為每份提單所代表的包裝貨(package cargo)的單位運(yùn)輸合同，這些合同可以各種形態(tài)出現(xiàn)，如諾成合同，也就是民法中的口頭承諾的合同、也就是事前的電話或電報(bào)約定。也可能由一種非屬任何格式的類別；運(yùn)費(fèi)協(xié)定(freight contracts )、大副簽收單(mate’s receipts )、不可轉(zhuǎn)讓之收據(jù)(non-negotiable receipts )、海運(yùn)單(seaway bills)及轉(zhuǎn)運(yùn)單證(through transportation documents)[15]等。而提單之簽發(fā)，也使這些之前簽立的合同，綜合在提單這份單證里了[16]。 考諸實(shí)際，提單字段只填寫裝貨港與目的港，不填寫收貨地點(diǎn)(place of receipt)與交貨地點(diǎn)(place of delivery)的，大多代表的就是散裝貨運(yùn)輸合同，或是租船提單(charter party B/L)，或許非貨柜船載運(yùn)之雜貨(general cargo)運(yùn)輸合同。除了裝貨港與目的港之外，提單字段填寫了收貨與交貨地點(diǎn)的，就是目前常見的貨柜運(yùn)送多式聯(lián)運(yùn)合同。這種情形下，海商法需要不需要就多式聯(lián)運(yùn)合同作特別說明？需要不需要特別界定承運(yùn)人？或者多式聯(lián)運(yùn)經(jīng)營人？答案可說十分清楚。而承運(yùn)人的責(zé)任范圍，只要根據(jù)提單，就能看出責(zé)任范圍；簽發(fā)單證為責(zé)任之始，收回單證則是責(zé)任之止。貨物送到內(nèi)陸，交貨給受貨人，收回提單，責(zé)任就到交貨時(shí)為止，劃分可說十分清楚。 四、班輪提單與租船提單 班輪運(yùn)送最重要的部分就是提單(運(yùn)輸單證)，貨物運(yùn)送的相關(guān)規(guī)定由提單證明之，這是當(dāng)運(yùn)輸合同沒有書面，或者運(yùn)輸合同零散出現(xiàn)在陸續(xù)船期通知等不具書面效力文件中的情形，因而需要提單做個(gè)總結(jié)[17]。以CGM CMA的格式條文為例，說「貨方同意所有與這批貨物運(yùn)送相關(guān)的之前協(xié)議、運(yùn)費(fèi)協(xié)議等，均因本提單之簽發(fā)而停止運(yùn)作，包括之前貨方與承運(yùn)人、其代理人、次合同人、其受雇人、其船長(zhǎng)或其船舶所約訂之任何協(xié)定亦然」(that all agreements or freight engagements for and in connection with the carriage of the Goods are superseded by the Bill of Lading, including any previous engagements between the Merchant and the Carrier, its agents, Subcontractors,employees, captains or vessels.)，代表提單就是唯一的合同決定性單證。 但如果提單代表的是租船合同，情況便大有不同，以波羅地海國際海運(yùn)同盟(The Baltic and International Maritime Council)之標(biāo)準(zhǔn)型(Uniform General Charter)定型化國際租船提單(charter party B/L)[18]為例，這類提單其上必印有「雙方同意應(yīng)依租船合同履行」(It is mutually agreed that this contract shall be performed subject to the conditions contained in this Charter Party……)[19]，提單不是之前所說的運(yùn)輸合同的總結(jié)，反是提單與租船合同沖突，以租船合同為準(zhǔn)，而非以提單為準(zhǔn)。僅提單當(dāng)事人不是承租人，即提單轉(zhuǎn)讓過程租船合同之外的其他持有人，提單是唯一之合同證明，這點(diǎn)漢堡規(guī)則說得最清楚[20]；提單依租船合同簽發(fā)，如關(guān)系介于承運(yùn)人與提單持有人、非承租人間時(shí)，公約規(guī)定適用提單(…bill of lading isissued pursuant to a charter-party, the provisions of the Convention apply to such a bill of lading if it governs the relation between the carrier and the holder of the bill of lading not being the Charterer.)，海牙系列公約亦有類似文字[21]。因此租船提單介于船方與非租船合同關(guān)系人之其他持有人間，提單與該租船合同提單代表之某次航程提單之權(quán)利、義務(wù)、責(zé)任依然以提單為本。 五、結(jié)論－海商法的海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同該怎么設(shè)計(jì) 任何一張?zhí)釂味伎烧f是一個(gè)縮小版的單位貨物運(yùn)輸合同，從提單里可找到為該批貨物負(fù)運(yùn)送責(zé)任的人、發(fā)單時(shí)貨方代表，也就是貨方的總負(fù)責(zé)人。運(yùn)送責(zé)任的起始與終止地點(diǎn)是運(yùn)送責(zé)任范圍、海運(yùn)履約方的負(fù)責(zé)范圍則是兩港港區(qū)、并由責(zé)任范圍劃定提單代表的是多式聯(lián)運(yùn)責(zé)任或港到港責(zé)任。提單適用哪個(gè)公約或那個(gè)國內(nèi)法，也可在提單內(nèi)找到答案。 依此，海商法的承運(yùn)人責(zé)任與義務(wù)、托運(yùn)人責(zé)任、貨物交付等之規(guī)定，均屬法律強(qiáng)制承運(yùn)人該負(fù)的基本責(zé)任、基本義務(wù)與可享的基本權(quán)利。提單正、背面有低于該基本責(zé)任、義務(wù)之條款無效，高于該基本權(quán)利之條款亦無效[22]。等于默示只能容許高于該基本責(zé)任、義務(wù)之條款、低于該基本權(quán)利之條款方為有效。至于多式聯(lián)運(yùn)經(jīng)營人則應(yīng)回歸承運(yùn)人一個(gè)名詞；提單證明的合同是多式聯(lián)運(yùn)，承運(yùn)人自然就是多式聯(lián)運(yùn)經(jīng)營人。提單證明的合同是港到港，自然承運(yùn)人的責(zé)任依然只有港到港之間。 海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同章應(yīng)該排除論程，不能把公約強(qiáng)制規(guī)定與合同的任意規(guī)定擺在一個(gè)章節(jié)，雖然論程租船合同特別說明尊重合同規(guī)定，兩者并存一章依然格格不入。 基于以上分析，提單雖為合同之證明，惟班輪運(yùn)送的提單與依租船合同簽發(fā)之提單，性質(zhì)與地位卻不相同。班輪為海商法之核心，提單又是班輪運(yùn)送重中之重，則海商法海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同章不納入運(yùn)送單證或提單節(jié)，似乎說不過去。租船提單又與班輪提單不同；性質(zhì)不同，地位不同、意義也有差異，因此便有提單獨(dú)立一章的考慮，以解決這個(gè)問題。 班輪提單種類與各種單證的性質(zhì)較復(fù)雜，班輪提單大多轉(zhuǎn)讓，租船提單則多為港到港提單(ocean B/L or port to port B/L)，轉(zhuǎn)讓過程少，關(guān)系人也較單純。班輪提單是總結(jié)所有運(yùn)輸合同的單證，租船提單則以租船合同為尊，除非在非承租人持有，始有提單之功能性，因此或也可以海上貨物運(yùn)輸合同章的提單與租船合同章的提單分開規(guī)定。更簡(jiǎn)易的做法，是租船合同章除了做三種租船合同定義及定位外，亦訂定租船提單；闡明提單在租船合同下之定位與意義，則海商法這個(gè)部分的修訂或許更為完整。 [1]由于美國海上貨物運(yùn)送法(carriage of goods by sea, 1936)之強(qiáng)制適用，美國航線之提單背面首要條款便有航經(jīng)美國須適用美國海上貨物運(yùn)送法之印刷條款。 [2]一般說到鹿特丹之強(qiáng)迫適用就是這個(gè)意思；貿(mào)易相對(duì)國適用，則因迫于貿(mào)易現(xiàn)實(shí)而適用。 [3]以往臺(tái)灣有承運(yùn)人提單背面首要條款印刷以日本海商法作為首要條款的。 [4]Article 1, (b),“ “Contract of carriage' applies only to contracts of carriage covered by a bill of lading or any similardocument of title, in so far as such document relates to the carriage of goodsby sea,..” of Hague Rules, Article 1 (b), “'Contract of carriage' appliesonly to contracts of carriage covered by a bill of lading or anysimilar document of title, in so far as such document relates to the carriageof goods by sea,…”, of Hague-visby Rules &Article 1, 7, “ 'Bill oflading' means a document which evidences a contract of carriage by seaand….” of Hamburg Rules. [5]全名United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea。 [6]Article 1,(b) 'Contract of carriage' applies only … covered by a bill of lading….including any bill of lading or…. issued under or pursuant to a charter party” of Hague Rules. [7] Article 1, (a) 'Carrier' includes….who enters into a contract of carriage with a shipper.” of Hague Rules. &(b) 'Contract of carriage' applies only ….covered by a bill of ladingor….” of Hague Rules. [8] Article 1,” (a) 'Carrier'includes the owner or the charterer who enters into a contract of carriage with a shipper.” & (b) 'Contract of carriage' ….covered by a bill oflading or…so far as…relates to the carriage of goods by sea, including any billof lading or ….issued under or pursuant to a charter party from the moment ….regulates the relations between a carrier and a holder of the same.” of Hague Rules. [9]Alexander von Ziegler, Johan Schelin,Stefano Zunarelli(以上作者為鹿特丹的擬稿人，書頁XX foreword by Editors), The Rotterdam Rules 2008, Commentary to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, 7. Obligations of the Shipper to the Carrier(by Johan Schelin) , Published by Kluwer LawInternational, p.158. [10]同上注，單證托運(yùn)人次之，p.159。 [11]Article 33,2 of Rotterdam Rules. [12]Article 5 ”The provisions of this Convention shall not be applicable to charter parties ….” of Hague Rules, Article V “The provisions of these Rules shall not be applicable to charter parties, but if….” of Visby amendments, & Article 2(scope of application),3 “3. The provisions of this Convention are not applicable to charter-parties. However, where…” of Hamburg Rules. [13] Article 6(specific exclusions),” 1. This Convention does not apply to the following contracts in liner transportation a)Charter parties; and (b)Other contracts for the use of a ship or of any space thereon.” of Rotterdam Rules.[14] Article 81, 1” 1….., as between the carrierand the shipper, a volume contract to which this Convention applies may provide for greater or lesser rights, obligations and liabilities than those imposed by this Convention.” of Rotterdam Rules. [15]原文”Depending on the manner in which the shipis employed, the contract of affreightment may be contained in a charterparty or contained in, or evidenced by, a bill of lading. But the classical division into charterparties and bills of lading is not exhaustive. Contracts of affreightment may be contained in or evidenced by documents which do not strictly fall into either category: e.g. freight contracts, mate’s receipts,non-negotiable receipts, sea waybills, ship’s delivery order, and through transportation documents.”，參Bernard Eder et al, Scrutton on Charterparties and Bills of Lading, 22nd edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2011,para.1-001. [16]參CMA CGM B/L Clause 3. (REMITTANCE ANDACCEPTANCE OF THE BILL OF LADING)'….In accepting this Bill of Lading, the Merchant agrees to be bound by all stipulation,…. face and back hereof, whetherwritten, typed, stamped or printed,…. , and agrees that all agreements or freight engagements for and in connection with the carriage of the Goods are superseded by the Bill of Lading, including any previous engagements between the Merchant and the Carrier, its agents, Subcontractors, employees, captainsor vessels.” [17]提單中常見之印刷文字，如”THE RECEIPT. CUSTODY, CARRIAGE AND DELIVERY OF THEGOODS ARE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS APPEARING ON THE FACE AND BACK HEREOF AND TOCARRIER’S APPLICABLE TARIFF”(Maersk Line B/L) 或者'….In accepting this Bill of Lading, the Merchant agrees to be bound by all stipulation,…. face and back hereof, whether written, typed, stamped or printed,…. , and agrees that all agreements or freight engagements for and in connection with the carriage of the Goods are superseded by the Bill of Lading, including any previous engagements between the Merchant and the Carrier, its agents,Subcontractors, employees, captains or vessels.”(CMA CGM B/L Clause 3.REMITTANCE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE BILL OF LADING) [18]Code name: GENCON B/L。 [19]同上注，page 1.。 [20]Article 2(scope of application),3. “The provisions of this Convention are not applicable to charter-parties. However, where a bill of lading is issued pursuant to a charter-party, the provisions of the Convention apply to such a bill of lading if it governs the relation between the carrier and the holder of the bill of lading, not being the charterer.” of Hamburg Rules. [21]Article 1,(b) & Article 5 of Hague Rules, Article 1,(b) & Article V of Visby Amendments. [22] Article 5 “A carrier shall be at liberty to surrender in whole or in part all or any of his rights and immunities or to increase any of his responsibilities and obligations under this Convention,provided such surrender or increase shall be embodied in the bill of lading issued to the shipper.” of Hague Rules. &Article V “A carrier shall be at liberty to surrender in whole or in part all or any of his rights and immunities or to increase any of his responsibilities and obligations under these Rules, provided such surrender or increase shall be embodied in the bill of lading issued to the shipper. The provisions of these Rules shall not be applicable to charter parties, but if bills of lading are issued in the case of a ship under a charter party they shall comply with the terms of these Rules….. of Visby Amendments. 來源： 海商法研究中心 王肖卿 |
|
|
