>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Zhejiang Branch of People's Insurance Company of China v. China Consolidation Services Ltd. of Shanghai (Case of Dispute over Subrogation for the Loss of Goods under the Contract for Carriage of Goods by Sea)
中国人民财产保险股份有限公司浙江省分公司诉上海瀚航集运有限公司海上货物运输合同货物灭失代位求偿纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Zhejiang Branch of People’s Insurance Company of China v. China Consolidation Services Ltd. of Shanghai (Case of Dispute over Subrogation for the Loss of Goods under the Contract for Carriage of Goods by Sea)
(Case of Dispute over Subrogation for the Loss of Goods under the Contract for Carriage of Goods by Sea)
中国人民财产保险股份有限公司浙江省分公司诉上海瀚航集运有限公司海上货物运输合同货物灭失代位求偿纠纷案

Zhejiang Branch of People's Insurance Company of China v. China Consolidation Services Ltd. of Shanghai
(Case of Dispute over Subrogation for the Loss of Goods under the Contract for Carriage of Goods by Sea)@#
[Judgment Abstract]@#
1. Under Article 51 of the Maritime Law, a carrier under a contract of carriage of goods by sea shall not be liable for loss of and damage to the goods caused by fire during its responsible time period. “Carrier” here refers to a person who, by itself or by authorizing another person, enters into a contract of carriage of goods by sea with a shipper under its name.@#
2. Under Article 46 of the Maritime Law, the carrier's responsible time period for goods carried in containers starts from the receiving of goods at the loading port and ends at the delivery of goods at the discharging port in which period the goods is under the control of the carrier. The fire in the subject case occurred during the carrier's responsibility time period for goods carried in containers and the occurrence of the fire was not caused by the carrier's own negligence. Hence, the carrier was exempted from the liabilities.@#
BASIC FACTS
@#
Plaintiff: Zhejiang Branch of People's Insurance Company of China, located at Middle Zhonghe Road of Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province.@#
Person in Charge: Zhu Shouzhong, general manager of the company.@#
Defendant: China Consolidation Services Ltd. of Shanghai, located at Shanghai Bund International Building, No.99 of Huangpu Road, Shanghai Municipality.@#
Legal Representative: Feng Chen, general manager of the company.@#
PROCEDURAL POSTURE@#
For the dispute over subrogation for the loss of goods under the contract for carriage of goods by sea, Zhejiang Branch of the People's Insurance Company of China (hereinafter referred to as Zhengjiang Branch of PICC) filed a lawsuit with Shanghai Maritime Court against China Consolidation Services Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Hanhang Company).@#
The plaintiff claimed that: in August 2004, Zhejiang G&F Foreign Trading Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Huilong Company) entrusted Hanhang Company to ship a batch of goods to Calcutta, India. Before the goods were delivered to the consignee, namely, when the goods were still under the charge of the carrier, a fire disaster broke out, which caused the loss of the goods. Huilong Company had taken all-risk insurance of carriage of goods by sea for these goods before they were shipped, so the plaintiff made an insurance claim against Huilong Company in accordance with the terms of the all-risk insurance contract and obtained the right of subrogation according to law. The plaintiff requests the court to order the defendant to pay USD 13962.85 for the plaintiff's loss and pay the legal cost of this case.@#
Hanhang Company argued that: it is true that the goods involved in this case were lost in a fire disaster as claimed by the plaintiff, but the plaintiff can't prove that it has properly fulfilled the obligation of paying insurance indemnities and that it has obtained the right of subrogation according to law. According to law, the defendant, as the carrier of the goods involved in this case, shall be exempted from liability for the loss of the goods due to a fire disaster. The defendant requests the court to dismiss the plaintiff's claim.@#
......

 

中国人民财产保险股份有限公司浙江省分公司诉上海瀚航集运有限公司海上货物运输合同货物灭失代位求偿纠纷案@#
【裁判摘要】@#
一、根据海商法五十一条的规定,海上货物运输合同的承运人对于在其责任期间内发生火灾事故造成货物灭失或者损坏的,不负赔偿责任。这里的“承运人”是指本人或者委托他人以本人名义与托运人订立海上货物运输合同的人。@#
二、根据海商法四十六条的规定,承运人对集装箱装运的货物的责任期间,是指从装货港接收货物时起至卸货港交付货物时止,货物处于承运人掌管之下的全部期间。本案火灾发生在承运人责任期间之内,并且火灾的发生并非由于承运人本人的过失所造成。因此,承运人得以免责。@#
@#
原告:中国人民财产保险股份有限公司浙江省分公司,住所地:浙江省杭州市中河中路。@#
负责人:朱守中,该分公司总经理。@#
被告:上海瀚航集运有限公司,住所地:上海市黄浦路99号上海滩国际大厦。@#
法定代表人:冯琛,该公司总经理。@#
@#
原告中国人民财产保险股份有限公司浙江省分公司(以下简称财保浙江分公司)因与被告上海瀚航集运有限公司(以下简称瀚航公司)发生海上货物运输合同货物灭失代位求偿纠纷,向上海海事法院提起诉讼。@#
原告财保浙江分公司诉称:2004年8月,浙江惠隆对外贸易有限责任公司(以下简称“惠隆公司”)委托被告瀚航公司出运一批货物至印度加尔各答。在货物交付收货人之前,即在承运人掌管货物期间,发生火灾致使货物灭失。惠隆公司在货物出运前就该批货物向原告投保了海上货物运输一切险,为此,原告依据保险合同规定向惠隆公司作出理赔,并依法取得代位求偿权。请求判令被告赔偿损失13 962.85美元并承担本案诉讼费。@#
被告瀚航公司辩称:原告财保浙江分公司诉称涉案货物已在火灾中灭失的事实属实,但原告未能证明其已适当地履行了保险赔付义务并已经依法取得代位求偿权。被告作为涉案货物的承运人,对于所承运的货物因火灾而灭失,依法应当免责。请求法院依法驳回原告起诉。@#
原告财保浙江分公司、被告瀚航公司分别提交了相关证据,上海海事法院依法组织双方当事人进行了质证、认证。@#
原告财保浙江分公司为证明被保险人惠隆公司与被告瀚航公司已经建立了海上货物运输合同关系,提供了由瀚航公司签发的涉案正本提单一式三份。瀚航公司经质证确认该提单为其签发,其身份为涉案海上货物运输合同的承运人。一审法院对该提单的证据效力予以确认。@#
原告财保浙江分公司为证明涉案被烧毁的货物价值,出示了货物发票原件、装箱单原件、出口货物报关单原件。被告瀚航公司质证认为原告提供的装箱单原件、出口货物报关单原件都是财保浙江分公司自己制作的,对上述二证据的真实性及内容持有异议。瀚航公司还认为,财保浙江分公司提供的出口货物报关单原件显示的提单号码与瀚航公司签发的提单号码不一致,价值与财保浙江分公司的诉讼请求不一致,主张该报关单与本案没有关联性,不应予以确认。财保浙江分公司称出口货物报关单上的提单号码是实际承运人签发的海运提单号码,海运提单号码与瀚航公司签发的货代提单号码确实不一致,但这是符合海上货物运输实际情况的,且海运提单与货运提单的关系可由业经瀚航公司确认的、瀚航公司于2005年5月10日出具的“情况说明”所证实。一审法院认为,货物发票及装箱单都是原件,且与提单的数量、唛头号码、货物名称等记载一致,货物发票与财保浙江分公司提交的、经海关审核的出口货物报关单显示的货价金额能够相互印证,故应当确认上述证据的效力。出口货物报关单显示的集装箱号码、CIF价、承运船舶、航次与涉案货物情况相符,故该证据的真实性及其与本案的关联性应予确认。@#
为证明涉案货物已遭火灾灭失,原告财保浙江分公司提供了被告瀚航公司致案外人杭州长发公司的函件原件,并称杭州长发公司为本案被保险人惠隆公司的货运代理。瀚航公司确认该函件是其致杭州长发公司的。一审法院确认该函件的证据效力。@#
为证明本案被保险人惠隆公司已向原告财保浙江分公司投保,财保浙江分公司提交了涉案货物的运输保险单。被告瀚航公司对该证据的真实性没有异议,但认为该保险合同是财保浙江分公司与惠隆公司签订的,对保险合同的内容有异议。一审法院认为,该保险单系经合法程序签订,内容与涉案提单、装箱单、发票等能够相互印证,应认定其证据效力。@#
原告财保浙江分公司出具了中国银行转账支票及中国人民财产保险股份有限公司杭州市分公司第一营业部出具的“说明”各一份,用以证明财保浙江分公司已经支付了涉案保险赔款。被告瀚航公司质证认为,财保浙江分公司提交的中国银行转账支票所反映的涉案保险理赔付款人是中国人民财产保险股份有限公司杭州市分公司第一营业部而非财保浙江分公司。对于中国人民财产保险股份有限公司杭州市分公司第一营业部的情况说明,瀚航公司认为与本案没有关联性。一审法院认为,财保浙江分公司提交的中国银行转账支票已经银行盖章受理,中国人民财产保险股份有限公司杭州市分公司第一营业部已经出具说明,证明其作为财保浙江分公司的代理付款人已经向被保险人惠隆公司赔付涉案保险赔款,故上述证据的效力应予确认。@#
为证明收货人印度AL AQSA公司已经将涉案保险单项下所有的权利转让给贸易卖家、发货人惠隆公司,授权惠隆公司从保险人处收取保险赔款、根据保险理赔需要而签署相应的文件,原告财保浙江分公司提供了经过公证、认证的授权书。被告瀚航公司经质证确认该授权书的真实性,但认为收货人印度AL AQSA公司仅授权惠隆公司收取保险赔偿的权利,并未授权惠隆公司再向他人转让相关权利,故不能据此证明财保浙江分公司取得了相应的代位求偿权。一审法院认为财保浙江分公司提交的、由收货人印度AL AQSA公司出具的授权书已经明确将涉案保险单项下所有权利授予惠隆公司,惠隆公司成为保险单项下受益人的事实应予确认。@#
为证明已经合法取得代位求偿权,原告财保浙江分公司还提交了惠隆公司出具的“收据及权益转让书”原件。被告瀚航公司经质证,对该证据的真实性提出异议,认为惠隆公司不是权益人,其权利只是收取保险赔款,无权转让权利。一审法院认为,财保浙江分公司提交的收据及权益转让书系原件,其真实性应予确认。惠隆公司通过印度AL AQSA公司的授权,有权签署收据及权益转让书。@#
一审审理期间,被告瀚航公司拟提交涉案火灾事故报告,但因印度西南部发生大面积水灾导致不能及时公证认证,就此向一审法院申请延期举证。一审法院认为,瀚航公司申请延期举证理由正当,本应准许,但鉴于原告财保浙江分公司已经确认涉案货物系因火灾而灭失的事实,且《中华人民共和国海商法》(以下简称海商法)规定对于因火灾造成货物灭失或损坏可以免除承运人举证责任,故瀚航公司能否提交涉案火灾事故报告对查明本案事实没有影响。瀚航公司未提交其他证据。@#
上海海事法院一审查明:@#
2004年8月18日,原告财保浙江分公司的被保险人惠隆公司与印度AL AQSA公司建立贸易合同关系。惠隆公司开具的发票显示销售的货物名称为漂白的桑蚕丝机织物,数量为10 266.80米,总计8箱,毛重448KG,净重412.8KG,CIF加尔各答价 13 962.85美元。惠隆公司把货物委托给被告瀚航公司承运。2004年8月26日,瀚航公司签发了编号为SHCCU04825569G的已装船指示提单,该提单显示货物托运人为惠隆公司,通知方为印度AL AQSA公司,承运船舶航次为KUO YU V.010S,运费预付,承运人责任期间为CFS-CFS。瀚航公司收取惠隆公司货物后,因为拼箱的原因,将该批货物装入NO.CRXU1737177集装箱,实际承运人出具的海运提单号码为SHACCU474360*03。同日,惠隆公司在财保浙江分公司就该批货物投保了海上货物运输一切险。2005年2月3日,瀚航公司告知涉案货物已于2004年10月5日运抵目的港印度加尔各答,瀚航公司已经于 2004年10月4日通知收货人前去提货。 2004年11月17日,瀚航公司从其在印度加尔各答港的代理处得知堆存涉案货物的码头仓库发生火灾,涉案货物全部被烧毁。 2005年1月12日,收货人印度AL AQSA公司签署了授权书,连同全套正本提单、保险单全部退还惠隆公司,将涉案货物提单项下所有权、保险单项下收货人所有权利和应得的赔偿,指派、转移并转让给发货人惠隆公司,并同意惠隆公司收取保险赔款,签发一切需要和适当的文件。2005年4月 28日,惠隆公司收到财保浙江分公司支付的涉案货物保险赔款15 360美元后,向财保浙江分公司签署收据和权益转让书。@#
......


Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥700.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese