|
INTRODUCTION
1. Purpose and scope of Incoterms
The
purpose of Incoterms is to provide a set of international
rules for the interpretation of the most commonly used trade
terms in foreign trade. Thus, the uncertainties of different
interpretations of such terms in different countries can be
avoided or at least reduced to a considerable degree.
Frequently, parties to a contract are unaware of the
different trading practices in their respective countries.
This can give rise to misunderstandings, disputes and
litigation, with all the waste of time and money that this
entails. In order to remedy these problems, the
International Chamber of Commerce first published in 1936 a
set of international rules for the interpretation of trade
terms. These rules were known as “Incoterms 1936”.
Amendments and additions were later made in 1953, 1967,
1976, 1980, 1990 and presently in 2000 in order to bring the
rules in line with current international trade practices.
It should be stressed that the scope of Incoterms is limited
to matters relating to the rights and obligations of the
parties to the contract of sale with respect to the delivery
of goods sold (in the sense of “tangibles”, not including
‘intangibles” such as computer software).
It appears that two particular misconceptions about
Incoterms are very common. First, lncoterms are frequently
misunderstood as applying to the contract of carriage rather
than to the contract of sale. Second, they are sometimes
wrongly assumed to provide for all the duties which parties
may wish to include in a contract of sale.
As has always been underlined by ICC, Incoterms deal only
with the relation between sellers and buyers under the
contract of sale, and, moreover, only do so in some very
distinct respects.
While it is essential for exporters and importers to
consider the very practical relationship between the various
contracts needed to perform an international sales
transaction
—
where not
only the contract of sale is required, but also contracts of
carriage, insurance and financing
—
Incoterms
relate to only one of these contracts, namely the contract
of sale.
Nevertheless, the parties’ agreement to use a particular
Incoterm would necessarily have implications for the other
contracts. To mention a few examples, a seller having agreed
to a CFR- or CIF-contract cannot perform such a contract by
any other mode of transport than carriage by sea, since
under these terms he must present a bill of lading or other
maritime document to the buyer which is simply not possible
if other modes of transport are used. Furthermore, the
document required under a documentary credit would
necessarily depend upon the means of transport intended to
be used.
Second,
Incoterms deal with a number of identified obligations
imposed on the parties
—
such as
the seller’s obligation to place the goods at the disposal
of the buyer or hand them over for carriage or deliver them
at destination
—
and with
the distribution of risk between the parties in these cases.
Further, they deal with the obligations to clear the goods
for export and import, the packing of the goods, the buyer’s
obligation to take delivery as well as the obligation to
provide proof that the respective obligations have been duly
fulfilled. Although lncoterms are extremely important for
the implementation of the contract of sale, a great number
of problems which may occur in such a contract are not dealt
with at all, like transfer of ownership and other property
rights, breaches of contract and the consequences following
from such breaches as well as exemptions from liability in
certain situations. It should be stressed that Incoterms are
not intended to replace such contract terms that are needed
for a complete contract of sale either by the incorporation
of standard terms or by individually negotiated terms.
Generally, Incoterms do not deal with the consequences of
breach of contract and any exemptions from liability owing
to various impediments. These questions must be resolved by
other stipulations in the contract of sale and the
applicable law.
Incoterms have always been primarily intended for use where
goods are sold for delivery across national boundaries:
hence, international commercial terms. However, Incoterms
are in practice at times also incorporated into contracts
for the sale of goods within purely domestic markets. Where
Incoterms are so used, the A2 and B2 clauses and any other
stipulation of other articles dealing with export and import
do, of course, become redundant.
2. Why
revisions of Incoterms?
The main
reason for successive revisions of Incoterms has been the
need to adapt them to contemporary commercial practice.
Thus, in the 1980 revision the term Free Carrier (now FCA)
was introduced in order to deal with the frequent case where
the reception point in maritime trade was no longer the
traditional FOB-point (passing of the ship’s rail) but
rather a point on land, prior to loading on board a vessel,
where the
goods were stowed into a container for subsequent transport
by sea or by different means of transport in combination
(so-called combined or multimodal transport).
Further, in the 1990 revision of Incoterms. the clauses
dealing with the O seller’s obligation to provide proof of
delivery permitted a replacement of paper documentation by
EDI-messages provided the parties had agreed to communicate
electronically. Needless to say, efforts are constantly made
to improve upon the drafting and presentation of Incoterms
in order to facilitate their practical implementation.
3.
Incoterms 2000
During
the process of revision, which has taken about two years,
ICC has done its best to invite views and responses to
successive drafts from a wide-ranging spectrum of world
traders, represented as these various sectors are on the
national committees through which ICC operates. Indeed, it
has been gratifying to see that this revision process has
attracted far more reaction from users around the world than
any of the previous revisions of Incoterms. The result of
this dialogue is Incoterms 2000, a version which when
compared with Incoterms 1990 may appear to have effected few
changes. It is clear, however, that Incoterms now enjoy
world-wide recognition and ICC has therefore decided to
consolidate upon that recognition and avoid change for its
own sake. On the other hand, serious efforts have been made
to ensure that the wording used in Incoterms 2000 clearly
and accurately reflects trade practice. Moreover,
substantive changes have been made in two areas:
• the customs clearance and payment of duty obligations
under FAS and DEQ; and
• the loading and unloading obligations under FCA.
All changes, whether substantive or formal have been made on
the basis of thorough research among users of Incoterms and
particular regard has been given to queries received since
1990 by the Panel of Incoterms Experts, set up as an
additional service to the users of Incoterms.
4.
Incorporation of Incoterms into
the
contract
of sale
In view
of the changes made to Incoterms from time to time, it is
important to ensure that where the parties intend to
incorporate Incoterms into their contract of sale, an
express reference is always made to the current version of
lncoterms. This may easily be overlooked when, for example,
a reference has been made to an earlier version in standard
contract forms or in order forms used by merchants. A
failure to refer to the current version may then result in
disputes as to whether the parties intended to incorporate
that version or an earlier version as a part of their
contract. Merchants wishing to use Incoterms 2000 should
therefore clearly specify that their contract is governed by
“Incoterms
2000”.
5. The
structure of Incoterms
In 1990,
for ease of understanding, the terms were grouped in four
basically different categories; namely starting with the
term whereby the seller only makes the goods available to
the buyer at the seller’s own
premises (the “F-term Ex works); followed by the second
group
g
whereby
the seller is called upon to deliver the goods to a carrier
appointed by the buyer (the F-terms FCA, FAS and FOB);
continuing with the “C-terms where the seller has to
contract for carriage, but
without
assuming the risk of loss of or damage to the goods or
additional costs due to events occurring after shipment and
dispatch (CFR, CIF, OPT and CIP); and, finally, the
“D”-terms whereby the seller has to bear all costs and risks
needed to bring the goods to the place of destination (DAF,
DES, DEQ, DDU and DDP). The following chart sets out this
classification of the trade terms.
INCOTERMS 2000
Group E
Departure
EXW
EX Work
(...
named
place)
Group F
Main carriage unpaid
FCA
Free
Carrier
(...
named
place)
FAS Free Alongside Ship
(...
named
port of shipment)
FOB Free On Board
(...
named
port of Shipment)
Group C
Main carriage paid
CFR
Cost and
freight
(...
named
port of destination)
CIF Cost, Insurance and Freight
(...
named
port of destination)
CPT Carriage Paid To
(...
named
place of destination)
CIP Carriage and Insurance paid To
(...
named
place of destination)
Group D
Arrival
DAF
Delivered
At Frontier
(...
named
place)
DES Delivered Ex Ship
(...
named
port of destination)
DEQ Delivered Ex Quay
(...
named
port of destination)
DDU
Delivered
Duty Unpaid
(...
named
place of destination)
DDP
Delivered
Duty Paid
(...
named
place of destination)
Further, under all terms, as in Incoterms 1990, the
respective obligations of the parties have been grouped
under 10 headings where each heading on the seller’s side
‘mirrors” the position of the buyer with respect to the same
subject matter.
6.
Terminology
While
drafting Incoterms 2000, considerable efforts have been made
to achieve as much consistency as possible and desirable
with respect to the various expressions used throughout the
thirteen terms. Thus, the use of different expressions
intended to convey the same meaning has been avoided. Also,
whenever possible, the same expressions as appear in the
1980 UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale
of Goods (CISG) have been used.
“shipper”
In some
cases it has been necessary to use the same term to express
two different meanings simply because there has been no
suitable alternative. Traders will be familiar with this
difficulty both in the context of contracts of sale and also
of contracts of .carriage. Thus, for example, the term
shipper” signifies both the person handing over the goods
for carriage and the person who makes the contract with the
carrier:
however, these two “shippers” may be different persons, for
example under a FOB contract where the seller would hand
over the goods for carriage and the buyer would make the
contract with the carrier.
“delivery”
It is
particularly important to note that the term “delivery” is
used in two different senses in Incoterms. First, it is used
to determine when the seller has fulfilled his delivery
obligation which is specified in the A4 clauses throughout
Incoterms. Second, the term “delivery” is also used in the
context of the buyer’s obligation to take or-accept delivery
of the goods, an obligation which appears in the B4 clauses
throughout Incoterms. Used in this second context, the word
“delivery” means first that the buyer “accepts” the very
nature of the ‘C-terms, namely that the seller fulfils his
obligations upon the shipment of the goods and, second that
the buyer is obliged to receive the goods. This latter
obligation is important so as to avoid unnecessary charges
for storage of the goods until they have been collected by
the buyer. Thus, for example under CFR and CIF contracts,
the buyer is bound to accept delivery of the goods and to
receive them from the carrier and if the buyer fails to do
so, he may become liable to pay damages to the seller who
has made the contract of carriage with the carrier or,
alternatively, the buyer might have to pay demurrage charges
resting upon the goods in order to obtain the carrier’s
release of the goods to him. When it is said in this context
that the buyer must “accept delivery”, this does not mean
that the buyer has accepted the goods as conforming with the
contract of sale, but only that he has accepted that the
seller has performed his obligation to hand the goods over
for carriage in accordance with the contract of carriage
which he has to make under the A3 a) clauses of the
“C-terms. So, if the buyer upon receipt of the goods at
destination were to find that the goods did not conform to
the stipulations in the contract of sale, he woUld be able
to use any remedies which the contract of sale and the
applicable law gave him against the seller, matters which,
as has already been mentioned, lie entirely outside the
scope of Incoterms.
Where appropriate, Incoterms 2000 have used the expression
“placing the goods at the disposal of” the buyer when the
goods are made available to the buyer at a particular place.
This expression is intended to bear the same meaning as that
of the phrase “handing over the goods” used in the 1980
United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International
Sale of Goods.
“usual”
The word
“usual” appears in several terms, for example in EXW with
respect to the time of delivery (A4) and in the ‘C-terms
with respect to the documents which the seller is obliged to
provide and the contract of carriage which the seller must
procure (A8, A3). It can, of course, be difficult to tell
precisely what the word “usual” means, however, in many
cases, it is possible to identify what persons in the trade
usually do and this practice will then be the guiding light.
In this sense, the word “usual’ is rather more helpful than
the word “reasonable”, which requires an assessment not
against the world of practice but against the more difficult
principle of good faith and fair dealing In some
circumstances it may well be necessary to decide what is
‘reasonable”. However, for the reasons given, in Incoterms
the word “usual” has been generally preferred to the word
“reasonable”.
“charges”
With
respect to the obligation to clear the goods for import it
is important to determine what is meant by “charges” which
must be paid upon import of the goods. In Incoterms 1990 the
expression “official charges payable upon exportation and
importation of tne goods” was used in DDP A6. In Incoterms
2000 DDP A6 the word “official” has been deleted, the reason
being that this word gave rise to some uncertainty when
determining whether the charge was “official” or not. No
change of substantive meaning was intended through this
deletion. The “charges” which must be paid only concern such
charges as are a necessary consequence of the import as such
and which thus have to be paid according to the applicable
import regulations. Any additional charges levied by private
parties in connection with the import are not to be included
in these charges, such as charges for storage unrelated to
the clearance obligation. However, the performance of that
obligation may well result in some costs to customs brokers
or freight forwarders if the
party bearing the obligation does not do the work himself.
“ports”,
“places”, “points” and “premises”
So far as
concerns the place at which the goods are to be delivered,
different expressions are used in Incoterms. In the terms
intended to be
used exclusively for carriage of goods by sea
—
such as
FAS, FOB, CFR, CIF, DES and DEQ
—
the
expressions “port of shipment” and “port of destination”
have been used. In all other cases the word “place” has been
used. In some cases, it has been deemed necessary also to
indicate a “point” within the port or place as it may be
important for the
seller to know not only that the goods should be delivered
in a particular area like a city but also where within that
area the goods should be placed at the disposal of the
buyer. Contracts of sale would frequently lack information
in this respect and Incoterms therefore stipulate that if no
specific point has been agreed within the named place, and
if there are several points available, the seller may select
the point which best suits his purpose (as an example see
FCA A4). Where the delivery point is the seller’s “place”
the expression “the seller’s premises” (FCA A4) has been
used.
“ship”
and “vessel”
In the
terms intended to be used for carriage of goods by sea, the
expressions “ship” and “vessel” are used as synonyms.
Needless to say, the term “ship” would have to be used when
it is an ingredient in the trade term itself such as in
“free alongside ship” (FAS) and “delivery ex ship” (DES).
Also, in view of the traditional use of the expression
“passed the ship’s rail” in FOB, the word “ship” has had to
be used in that connection.
“checking” arid “inspection”
In the A9
and B9 clauses of lncoterms the headings “checking
—
packaging
and marking” and “inspection of the goods” respectively have
been used. Although the words “checking” and “inspection”
are synonyms, it has been deemed appropriate to use the
former word with respect to the seller’s delivery obligation
under A4 and to reserve the latter for the particular case
when a “pre-shipment inspection” is performed, since such
inspection normally is only required when the buyer or the
authorities of the export or import country want to ensure
that the goods conform with contractual or official
stipulations before they are shipped.
7. The
sellers delivery obligations
Incoterms
focus on the seller’s delivery obligation. The precise
distribution of functions and costs in connection with the
seller’s delivery of the goods would normally not cause
problems where the parties have a continuing commercial
relationship. They would then establish a practice between
themselves (“course of dealing”) which they would follow in
subsequent dealings in the same manner as they have done
earlier. However, if a new commercial relationship is
established or if a contract is made through the medium of
brokers
—
as is
comrr ion in the sale of commodities
—
one would
have to apply the stipulations of the contract of sale and,
whenever Incoterms 2000 have been incorporated into that
contract, apply the division of functions, costs and risks
following therefrom.
It would, of course, have
been desirable if Incoterms could specify in as detailed a
manner as possible the duties of the parties in connection
with the delivery of the goods. Compared with Incoterms
1990, further efforts
have been
made in this respect in some specified instances (see for
example FCA A4). But it has not been possible to avoid
reference to customs of the trade in FAS and FOB A4 (in the
manner customary at the port”), the reason being that
particularly in commodity trade the exact manner in which
the goods are delivered for carriage in FAS and FOB
contracts vary in the different sea ports.
8. Passing of
risks and costs relating to the goods
The risk
of loss of or damage to the goods, as well as the obligation
to bear the costs relating to the goods, passes from the
seller to the buyer when the seller has fulfilled his
obligation to deliver the goods. Since the buyer should not
be given the possibility to delay the passing of the risk
and costs, all terms stipulate that the passing of risk and
costs may occur even before delivery, if the buyer does not
take delivery as agreed or fails to give such instructions
(with respect to time for shipment and/or place for
delivery) as the seller may require in order to fulfil his
obligation to deliver the goods. It is a requirement for
such premature passing of risk and costs that the goods have
been identified as intended for the buyer or, as is
stipulated in the terms, set aside for him (appropriation).
This requirement is particularly important under EXW, since
under all other terms the goods would normally have been
identified as intended for the buyer when measures have been
taken for their shipment or dispatch (“F”- and ‘C-terms) or
their delivery at destination (“D”-terms). In exceptional
cases, however, the goods may have been sent from the seller
in bulk without identification of the quantity for each
buyer and, if so, passing of risk and cost does not occur
before the goods have been appropriated as aforesaid (cf.
also article 69.3 of the 1980 United Nations Convention on
Contracts for the International Sale of Goods).
9. The terms
9.1 The “E”-term is the term in which the seller’s
obligation is at
its
minimum:
the
seller has to do no more than place the goods at the
disposal of the buyer at the agreed place
—
usually
at the seller’s own premises. On the other hand, as a matter
of practical reality, the seller would frequently assist the
buyer in loading the goods on the latter’s collecting
vehicle. Although EXW would better reflect this if the
seller’s obligations were to be extended so as to include
loading, it was thought desirable to retain the traditional
principle of the seller’s minimum obligation under EXW so
that it could be used for cases where the seller does not
wish to assume any obligation whatsoever with respect to the
loading of the goods. If the buyer wants the seller to do
more, this should be made clear in the contract of sale.
9.2
The
‘F-terms
require
the seller to deliver the goods for carriage as instructed
by the buyer. The point at which the parties intend delivery
to occur in the FCA term has caused difficulty because
of
the wide variety of circumstances which may surround
contracts covered by this term. Thus, the goods may be
loaded on a collecting vehicle sent by the buyer to pick
them up at the seller’s premises; alternatively, the goods
may need to be unloaded from a vehicle sent by the seller to
deliver the goods at a terminal named by the buyer.
lncoterms 2000 take account of these alternatives by
stipulating that, when the place named in the contract as
the place of delivery is the seller’s premises, delivery is
complete when the goods are loaded on the buyer’s collecting
vehicle and, in other cases, delivery is complete when the
goods are placed at the disposal of the buyer not unloaded
from the seller’s vehicle. The variations mentioned for
different modes of transport in FCA A4 of Incoterms 1990 are
not repeated in lncoterms 2000.
The delivery point under FOB, which is the same under
CFR and CIF, has been left unchanged in Incoterms 2000 in
spite of a considerable debate. Although the notion under
FOB to deliver the goods “across the ship’s rail” nowadays
may seem inappropriate in many cases, it is nevertheless
understood by merchants and applied in a manner which takes
account of the goeds and the available loading facilities.
It was felt that a change of the FOB-point would create
unnecessary confusion, particularly with respect to sale of
commodities carried by sea typically under charter parties.
Unfortunately, the word ‘FOB” is used by some merchants
merely to indicate any point of delivery
—
such as
‘FOB factory”, “FOB plant”, “FOB Ex seller’s works” or other
inland points
thereby neglecting what the abbreviation means: Free
On
Board.
It remains the case that such use of “FOB” tends to create
confusion and should be avoided.
There is an important change of FAS relating to the
obligation to clear the goods for export, since it appears
to be the most common practice to put this duty on the
seller rather than on the buyer. In order to ensure that
this change is duly noted it has been marked with capital
letters in the preamble of FAS.
9.3
The
“C-terms
require
the seller to contract for carriage on usual terms at his
own expense. Therefore, a point up to which he would have to
pay transport costs must necessarily be indicated after the
respective “C-term. Under the CIF and CIP terms the seller
also has to take out insurance and bear the insurance cost.
Since the point for the division of costs is fixed at a
point in the country of destination, the “C-terms are
frequently mistakenly believed to be arrival contracts, in
which the seller would bear all risks and costs until the
goods have actually arrived at the agreed point. However, it
must be stressed that the “C-terms are of the same nature as
the “F”-terms in that the seller fulfils the
contract in the country of shipment or dispatch. Thus, the
contracts of sale under the “C”-terms, like the contracts
under the ‘F-terms, fall within the category of shipment
contracts.
It is in the nature of shipment contracts that, while the
seller is bound to pay the normal transport cost for the
carriage of the goods by a usual route and in a customary
manner to the agreed place, the risk of loss of or damage to
the goods, as well as additional costs resulting from events
occurring after the goods having been appropriately
delivered for carriage, fall upon the buyer. Hence, the
“C”-terms are distinguishable from all other terms in that
they contain two “critical” points, one indicating the point
to which the seller is bound to arrange and bear the costs
of a contract of carriage and another one for the allocation
of risk. For this reason, the greatest caution must be
observed when adding obligations of the seller to the
“C”-terms which seek to extend the seller’s responsibility
beyond the aforementioned “critical” point for the
allocation of risk. It is of the very essence of the
“C-terms that the seller is relieved of any further risk and
cost after he has duly fulfilled his contract by contracting
for carriage and handing over the goods to the carrier and
by providing for insurance under the CIF- and CIP-terms.
The essential nature of the “C-terms as shipment contracts
is also illustrated by the common use of documentary credits
as the preferred mode of payment used in such terms. Where
it is agreed by the parties to the sale contract that the
seller will be paid by presenting the agreed shipping
documents to a bank under a documentary credit, it would be
quite contrary to the central purpose of the documentary
credit for the seller to bear further risks and costs after
the moment when payment had been made under documentary
credits or otherwise upon shipment and dispatch of the
goods. Of course, the seller would have to bear the cost of
the contract of carriage irrespective of whether freight is
pre-paid upon shipment or is payable at destination (freight
collect); however, additional costs which may result from
events occurring subsequent to shipment and dispatch are
necessarily for the account of the buyer.
If the seller has to provide a contract of carriage which
involves payment of duties, taxes and other charges, such
costs will, of course, fall upon the seller to the extent
that they are for his account under that contract. This is
now explicitly set forth in the A6 clause of all “C-terms.
If
it is customary to procure several contracts of carriage
involving transhipment of the goods at intermediate places
in order to reach the agreed destination, the seller would
have to pay all these costs, including any costs incurred
when the goods are transhipped from one means of conveyance
to the other. If, however, the carrier exercised his rights
under a transhipment or similar clause
—
in order
to avoid unexpected hindrances (such as ice, congestion,
labour disturbances, government orders, war or warlike
operations) then any additional cost resulting therefrom
would be for the account of the buyer, since the seller’s
obligation is limited to procuring the usual contract of
carriage.
It happens quite often that the parties to the contract of
sale wish to clarify the extent to which the seller should
procure a contract of carriage including the costs of
discharge. Since such costs are normally covered by the
freight when the goods are carried by regular shipping
lines, the contract of sale wilL frequently stipulate that
the goods are to be so carried or at least that they are to
be carried under “liner terms”. In other cases, the word
“landed” is added after CFR or OlE However, it is advisable
not to use abbreviations added to the “C-terms unless, in
the relevant trade, the meaning of the abbreviations is
clearly understood and accepted by the contracting parties
or under any applicable law or custom of the trade.
In particular, the seller should not
—
and
indeed could not, without changing the very nature of the
“C”-terms
—
undertake
any obligation with respect to the arrival of the goods at
destination, since the risk of any delay during the carriage
is borne by the buyer. Thus, any obligation with respect to
time must necessarily refer to the place of shipment or
dispatch, for example, “shipment (dispatch) not later than
.
An
agreement for example, “CFR Hamburg not later than is really
a misnomer and thus open to different possible
interpretations. The parties could be taken to have meant
either that the goods must actually arrive at Hamburg at the
specified date, in which case the contract is not a shipment
contract but an arrival contract or, alternatively, that the
seller must ship the goods at such a time that they would
normally arrive at Hamburg before the specified date unless
the carriage would have been delayed because of unforeseen
events.
It happens in commodity trades that goods are bought while
they are at sea and that, in such cases, the word “afloat”
is added after the trade term. Since the risk of loss of or
damage to the goods would then, under the CFR- and
CIF-terms, have passed from the seller to the buyer,
difficulties of interpretation might arise. One possibility
would be to maintain the ordinary meaning of the CFR- and
CIF-terms with respect to the allocation of risk between
seller and buyer, namely that risk passes on shipment: this
would mean that the buyer might have to assume the
consequences of events having already occurred at the time
when the contract of sale enters into force. The other
possibility would be to let the passing of the risk coincide
with the time when the contract of sale is concluded. The
former possibility might well be practical, since it is
usually impossible to ascertain the condition of the goods
while they are being carried. For this reason the 1980
United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International
Sale of Goods article 68 stipulates that “if the
circumstances so indicate, the risk is assumed by the buyer
from the time the goods were handed over to the carrier who
issued the documents embodying the contract of carriage”.
There is, however, an exception to this rule when ‘the
seller knew or ought to have known that the goods had been
lost or damaged and did not disclose this to the buyer”.
Thus, the interpretation of a CFRor CIF-term with the
addition of the word “afloat” will depend upon the law
applicable to the contract of sale. The parties are advised
to ascertain the applicable law and any solution which might
follow therefrom. In case of doubt, the parties are advised
to clarify the matter in their contract.
In practice, the parties frequently continue to use the
traditional expression C&F (or C and C+F). Nevertheless, in
most cases it would appear that they regard these
expressions as equivalent to CFR. In order to avoid
difficulties of interpreting their contract the parties
should use the correct Incoterm which is CFR, the only
world-wide-accepted standard abbreviation for the term “Cost
and Freight
(...
named port of destination)”.
CFR and CIF in A8 of Incoterms 1990 obliged the seller to
provide a copy of the charterparty whenever his transport
document (usually the bill of lading) contained a reference
to the charterparty, for example, by the frequent notation
“all other terms and conditions as per charterparty”.
Although, of course, a contracting party should always be
able to ascertain all terms of his contract
—
preferably at the time of the conclusion of the contract
—
it
appears that the practice to provide the charterparty as
aforesaid has created problems particularly in connection
with documentary credit transactions. The obligation of the
seller under CFR and CIF to provide a copy of the
charterparty together with other transport documents has
been deleted in Incoterms 2000.
Although the A8 clauses of Incoterms seek to ensure that the
seller provides the buyer with “proof of delivery”, it
should be stressed that the seller fulfils that requirement
when he provides the “usual” proof. Under CPT and CIP it
would be the “usual transport document” and under CFR and
CIF a bill of lading or a sea waybill. The transport
documents must be “clean”, meaning that they must not
contain clauses or notations expressly declaring a defective
condition of the goods and/or the packaging. If such clauses
or notations appear in the document, it is regarded as
“unclean” and would then not be accepted by banks in
documentary credit transactions. However, it should be noted
that a transport document even without such clauses or
notations would usually not provide the buyer with
incontrovertible proof as against the carrier that the goods
were shipped n conformity with the stipulations of the
contract of sale. Usually, the carrier would, in
standardized text on the front page of the transport
document, refuse to accept responsibility for information
with respect to the goods by indicating that the particulars
inserted in the transport document constitute the shipper’s
declarations and therefore that the information is only
“said to be” as inserted in the document. Under most
applicable laws and principles, the carrier must at least
use reasonable means of checking the correctness of the
information and his failure to do so may make him liable to
the consignee. However, in container trade, the carrier’s
means of checking the contents in the container would not
exist unless he himself was responsible for stowing the
container.
There are only two terms which deal with insurance, namely
CIF and CIP. Under these terms the seller is obliged to
procure insurance for the benefit of the buyer. In other
cases it is for the parties themselves to decide whether and
to what extent they want to cover themsplves by insurance.
Since the seller takes out insurance for the benefit of the
buyer, he would not know the buyer’s precise requirements.
Under the Institute Cargo Clauses drafted by the Institute
of London Underwriters, insurance is available in “minimum
cover” under Clause C, “medium cover” under Clause B and
“most extended cover” under Clause A. Since in the sale of
commodities under the CIF term the buyer may wish to sell
the goods in transit to a subsequent buyer who in turn may
wish to resell the goods again, it is impossible to know the
insurance cover suitable to such subsequent buyers and,
therefore, the minimum cover under CIF has traditionally
been chosen with the possibility for the buyer to require
the seller to take out additional insurance. Minimum cover
is however unsuitable for sale of manufactured goods where
the risk of theft, pilferage or improper handling or custody
of the goods would require more than the cover available
under Clause C. Since CIP, as distinguished from CIF, would
normally not be used for the sale of commodities, it would
have been feasible to adopt the most extended cover under
CIP rather than the minimum cover under CIF. But to vary the
seller’s insurance obligation under CIF and CIP would lead
to confusion and both terms therefore limit the seller’s
insurance obligation to the minimum cover. It is
particularly important for the CIP-buyer to observe this:
should additional cover be required he should agree with the
seller that the latter could take out additional insurance
or, alternatively, arrange for extended insurance cover
himself. There are also particular instances where the buyer
may wish to obtain even more protection than is available
under Institute Clause A, for example insurance against war,
riots, civil commotion, strikes or
other
labour disturbances. If he wishes the seller to arrange such
insurance he must instruct him accordingly in which case the
seller would have to provide such insurance if procurable.
9.4 The “D”-terms are different in nature from
the “C-terms, since the seller according to the “D”-terms is
responsible for the arrival of the goods at the agreed place
or point of destination at the border or within the
country of import. The seller must bear all risks
and costs in bringing the goods thereto. Hence, the “D”terms
signify arrival contracts, while the “C-terms
evidence departure (shipment) contracts.
Under the “D”-terms except DDP the seller does not have
to deliver the goods cleared for import in the country
of destination.
Traditionally, the seller had the obligation to clear
the goods for import under DEQ, since the goods had to be
landed on the quay and thus were brought into the country of
import. But owing to changes in customs clearance procedures
in most countries, it is now more appropriate that the party
domiciled in the country concerned undertakes the clearance
and pays the duties and other charges. Thus, a change in DEC
has been made for the same reason as the change in FAS
previously mentioned. As in FAS, in DEQ the change has been
marked with capital letters in the preamble.
It appears that in many countries trade terms not included
in Incoterms are used particularly in railway traffic
(franco border”, “franco-frontiere”, ‘Frei Granze”).
However, under such terms it is normally not intended that
the seller should assume the risk of loss of or damage to
goods during the transport up to the border. It would be
preferable in these circumstances to use CPT indicating the
border. If, on the other hand, the parties intend that the
seller should bear the risk during the transport DAF
indicating the border would be appropriate.
The DDU term was added in the 1990 version of lncoterms. The
term fulfils an important function whenever the seller is
prepared to deliver the goods in the country of destination
without clearing the goods for import and paying the duty.
In countries where import clearance may be difficult and
time-consuming, it may be risky for the seller to undertake
an obligation to deliver the goods beyond the customs
clearance point. Although, according to DDU B5 and B6, the
buyer would have to bear the additional risks and costs
which might follow from his failure to fulfil his
obligations to clear the goods for import, the seller is
advised not to use the DDU term in countries where
difficulties might be expected in clearing the goods for
import.
10. The expression “No obligation”
As
appears from the expressions “the seller must” and ‘the
buyer must” lncoterms are only concerned with the
obligations which the parties owe to each other. The words
“no obligation” have therefore been inserted whenever one
party does not owe an obligation to the other party. Thus,
if for instance according to A3 of the respective term the
seller has to arrange and pay for the contract of carriage
we find the words “no obligation” under the heading
“contract of carriage” in B3 a) setting forth the buyer’s
position. Again, where neither party owes the other an
obligation, the words “no obligation” will appear with
respect to both parties, for example, with respect to
insurance.
In either case, it is important to point out that even
though one party may be under “no obligation” towards the
other to perform a certain task, this does not mean that it
is not in his interest to perform that task. Thus, for
example, just because a CFR buyer owes his seller no duty to
make a contract of insurance under B4, it is clearly in his
interest to make such a contract, the seller being under no
such obligation to procure insurance cover under A4.
11.
Variants
of Incoterms
In
practice, it frequently happens that the parties themselves
by adding words to an Incoterm seek further precision than
the term could offer. It should be underlined that Incoterms
give no guidance whatsoever for such additions, Thus, if the
parties cannot rely on a well-established custom of the
trade for the interpretation of such additions they may
encounter serious problems when no consistent understanding
of the additions could be proven.
If for instance the common expressions “FOB stowed” or ‘EXW
loaded” are used, it is impossible to establish a world-wide
understanding to the effect that the seller’s obligations
are extended not only with respect to the cost of actually
loading the goods in the ship or on the vehicle respectively
but also include the risk of fortuitous loss of or damage to
the goods in the process of stowage and loading. For these
reasons, the parties are strongly advised to clarity whether
they only mean that the function or the cost of the stowage
and loading operations should fall upon the seller or
whether he should also bear the risk until the stowage and
loading has actually been completed. These are questions to
which Incoterms do not provide an answer: consequently, if
the contract too fails expressly to describe the parties’
intentions, the parties may be put to much unnecessary
trouble and cost.
A1though
Incoterms 2000 do not provide for many of these commonly
used variants, the preambles to certain trade terms do alert
the parties to the need for special contractual terms if the
parties wish to go beyond the stipulations of Incoterms.
EXW
the added
obligation for the seller to load the goods on the buyer’s
collecting vehicle;
CIF/CIP
the
buyer’s need for additional insurance;
DEQ
the added
obligation for the seller to pay for costs after discharge.
In some cases sellers and buyers refer to commercial
practice in liner and charterparty trade. In these
circumstances, it is necessary to clearly distinguish
between the obligations of the parties under the contract of
carriage and their obligations to each other under the
contract of sale. Unfortunately, there are no authoritative
definitions of expressions such as “liner terms” and
“terminal handling charges” (THC). Distribution of costs
under such terms may differ in different places and change
from time to time. The parties are recommended to clarify in
the contract of sale how such costs should be distributed
between themselves.
Expressions frequently used in charterparties,
5’jO1
as FOB
stowed”, “FOB stowed and trimmed”, are sometimes used in
contracts of sale in order to clarify to what extent the
seller under FOB has to perform stowage and trimming of the
goods onboard the ship. Where such words are added, it is
necessary to clarify in the contract of sale whether the
added obligations only relate to costs or to both costs and
risks.
As has been said, every effort has been made to ensure that
Incoterms reflect the most Gommon commercial practice.
However in some cases
—
particularly where Incoterms 2000 differ from Incoterms 1990
—
the parties may wish the trade terms to operate differently.
They are reminded of such options in the preamble of the
terms signalled by the word “However”.
I
.
Cusvoms of the port or of a particular trade
Since
Incoterms provide a set of terms for use in different trades
and regions it is impossible always to set forth the
obligations of the parties with precision. To some extent it
is therefore necessary to refer to the custom of the port or
of the particular trade or to the practices which the
parties themselves may have established in their previous
dealings (cf. article 9 of the 1980 United Nations
Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of
Goods). It is of course desirable that sellers and buyers
keep themselves duly informed of such customs when they
negotiate their contract and that, whenever uncertainty
arises, they clarify their legal position by appropriate
clauses in their contract of sale. Such special provisions
in the individual contract would supersede or vary anything
that is set forth as a rule of interpretation in the various
Incoterms.
13. The buyer’s options as to the place of shipment
In some
situations, it may not be possible at the time when the
contract of sale is entered into to decide precisely on the
exact point or even the place where the goods should be
delivered by the seller for carriage. For instance reference
might have been made at this stage merely to a range” or to
a rather large place, for example, seaport, and it is then
usually stipulated that the buyer has the right or duty to
name later on the more precise point within the range or the
place. If the buyer has a duty to name the precise point as
aforesaid his failure to do so might result in liability to
bear the risks and additional costs resulting from such
failure (B5/B7 of all terms). In addition, the buyer’s
failure to use his right to indicate the point may give the
seller the right to select the point which best suits his
purpose (FCA A4).
14.
Customs clearance
The term
“customs clearance” has given rise to misunderstandings.
Thus, whenever reference is made to an obligation of the
seller or the buyer to undertake obligations in connection
with passing the goods through customs of the country of
export or import it is now made clear that this obligation
does not only include the payment of duty and other charges
but also the performance and payment of whatever
administrative matters are connected with the passing of the
goods through customs and the information to the authorities
in this connection. Further, it has
—
although
quite wrongfully
—
been
considered in some quarters inappropriate to use terms
dealing with the obligation to clear the goods through
customs when, as in intra-European Union trade or other free
trade areas, there is no longer any obligation to pay duty
and no restrictions relating to import or export. In order
to clarify the situation, the words ‘where applicable” have
been added in the A2 and B2, A6 and B6 clauses of the
relevant Incoterms
in order
for them to be used without any
ambiciuitv where no customs Drocedures are required.
It is
normally desirable that customs clearance is arranged by the
party domiciled in the country where such clearance should
take place or at least by somebody acting there on his
behalf. Thus, the exporter should normally clear the goods
for export, while the importer should clear the goods for
import.
Incoterms
1990 departed from this under the trade terms EXW and FAS
(export clearance duty on the buyer) and DEQ (import
clearance duty on the seller) but in Incoterms 2000 FAS and
DEQ place the duty of clearing the goods for export on the
seller and to clear them for import on the buyer
respectively, while EXW
—
representing the seller’s minimum obligation
—
has been
left unamended (export clearance duty on the buyer). Under
DDP the seller specifically agrees to do what follows from
the very name of the term
—
Delivered Duty Paid
—
namely to
clear the goods for import and pay any duty as a consequence
thereof.
15.
Packaging
In most
cases, the parties would know beforehand which packaging is
required for the safe carriage of the goods to destination.
However, since the seller’s obligation to pack the goods may
well vary according to the type and duration of the
transport envisaged, it has been felt necessary to stipulate
that the seller is obliged to pack the goods in such a
manner as is required for the transport, but only to the
extent that the circumstances relating to the transport are
made known to him before the contract of sale is concluded
(cf. articles 35.1. and 35.2.b. of the 1980 United Nations
Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods
where the goods, including packaging, must be “fit for any
particular purpose expressly or impliedly made known to the
seller at the time of the conclusion of the contract, except
where the circumstances show that the buyer did not rely, or
that it was unreasonable for him to rely, on the seller’s
skill and judgement”).
16.
Inspection of goods
In many
cases, the buyer may be well advised to arrange for
inspection of the goods before or at the time they are
handed over by the seller for carriage (so-called
pre-shipment inspection or PSI). Unless the contract
stipulates otherwise, the buyer would himself have to pay
the cost for such inspection that is arranged in his own
interest. However, if the inspection has been made in order
to enable the seller to comply with any mandatory rules
applicable to the export of the goods in his own country,
the seller would have to pay for that inspection, unless the
EXW term is used, in which case the costs of such inspection
are for the account of the buyer.
17. Mode
of transport and the appropriate Incoterm 2000 Any mode of
transport
Group E
EXW
Ex Works
(...
named
place)
Group F
FCA
Free
Carrier
(...
named place)
Group C
CPT
Carriage
Paid To (.. named place of destination)
CIP
Carriage
and Insurance Paid
To (...
named place
of destination)
Group D
DAF
Delivered At Frontier
(...
named place)
DDU
Delivered Duty
Unpaid
(.. named lace of destination)
DDP
Delivered Duty Paid
(...
named place of destination)
Maritime
and inland waterway transport only
Group F
FAS
Free
Alongside Ship (... named port of shipment)
FOB
Free On
Board (... named port of shipment)
Group C
CFR
Cost and
Freight (... named port of destination)
CIF
Cost,
Insurance and Freight (... named port of destination)
Group
D
DES
Delivered
Ex Ship (... named port of destination)
DEQ
Delivered
Ex Quay (... named port of destination)
18. The
recommended use
In some
cases the preamble recommends the use or non-use of a
particular term. This is particularly important with respect
to the choice between FCA and FOB. Regrettably, merchants
continue to use FOB when it is totally out of place thereby
causing the seller to incur risks subsequent to the handing
over of the goods to the carrier named by the buyer. FOB is
only appropriate to use where the goods are intended to be
delivered “across the ship’s rail” or, in any event, to
the ship and not where the goods are handed over to
the carrier for subsequent entry into the ship, for
example stowed in containers or loaded on lorries or wagons
in so-called roll on
—
roll off
traffic. Thus, a strong warning has been made in the
preamble of FOB that the term should not be used when
the parties do not intend delivery across the ship’s rail.
It happens that the parties by mistake use terms intended
for carriage of goods by sea also when another mode of
transport is contemplated. This may put the seller in the
unfortunate position that he cannot fulfil his obligation to
tender the proper document to the buyer (for example a bill
of lading, sea waybill or the electronic equivalent). The
chart printed at paragraph 17 above makes clear which trade
term in Incoterms 2000 it is appropriate to use for which
mode of transport. Also, it is indicated in the preamble of
each term whether it can be used for all modes of transport
or only for carriage of goods by sea.
19. The
bill of lading and electronic commerce
Traditionally, the on board bill of lading has been the only
acceptable document to be presented by the seller under the
CFR and CIF terms. The bill of lading fulfils three
important functions, namely:
—
proof of delivery of the goods on board the vessel;
—
evidence of the contract of carriage; and
—
a
means of transferring rights to the goods in transit to
another party by the transfer of the paper document to him.
Transport documents other than the bill of lading would
fulfil the two first- mentioned functions, but would not
control the delivery of the goods at destination or enable a
buyer to sell the goods in transit by surrendering the paper
document to his buyer. Instead, other transport documents
would name the party entitled to receive the goods at
destination. The
fact that the possession of the bill of lading is required
in order to obtain the goods from the carrier at destination
makes it particularly difficult to replace by electronic
means of communication.
Further, it is customary to issue bills of lading in several
originals but it is, of course, of vital importance for a
buyer or a bank acting upon his instructions in paying the
seller to ensure that all originals are
surrendered by the seller (so-called “full set”). This is
also a requirement
under the ICC Rules for Documentary Credits (the so-called
ICC Uniform
Customs
and Practice, “UCP”; current version at date of publication
of Incoterms 2000: ICC publication 500).
The
transport document must evidence not only delivery of the
goods to the carrier but also that the goods, as far as
could be ascertained by the carrier, were received in good
order and condition. Any notation on the transport document
which would indicate that the goods had not been in such
condition would make the document unclean” and would thus
make it unacceptable under the IJCP.
In spite
of the particular legal nature of the bill of lading it is
expected that it will be replaced by electronic means in the
near future, The 1990 version of Incoterms had already taken
this expected development into proper account. According to
the A8 clauses, paper documents may be replaced by
electronic messages provided the parties have agreed to
communicate electronically. Such messages could be
transmitted directly to the party concerned or through a
third party providing added- value services. One such
service that can be usefully provided by a third party is
registration of successive holders of a bill of lading.
Systems providing such services, such as the so-called
BOLERO service, may require further support by appropriate
legal norms and principles as evidenced by the CMI 1990
‘Rules for Electronic Bills of Lading and articles 16-17 of
the 1996 UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce.
20.
Non-negotiable transport documents instead of bills of
lading
In
recent years, a considerable simplification of documentary
practices has en achieved, Bills of lading are frequently
replaced by nonnegotiable documents similar to those which
are used for other modes of transport than carriage by sea.
These documents are called “sea waybills”, “liner waybills”,
“freight receipts”, or variants of such expressions.
Non-negotiable documents are quite satisfactory to use
except where the buyer wishes to sell the goods in transit
by surrendering a paper document to the new buyer. In order
to make this possible, the obligation of the seller to
provide a bill of lading under CFR and CIF must necessarily
be retained. However, when the contracting parties know that
the buyer does not contemplate selling the goods in transit,
they may specifically agree to relieve the seller from the
obligation to provide a bill of lading, or, alternatively,
they may use CPT and CIP where there is no requirement to
provide a bill of lading.
21. The
right to give instructions to the carrier
A buyer
paying for the goods under a “C-term should ensure that the
seller upon payment is prevented from disposing of the goods
by giving new instructions to the carrier, Some transport
documents used for particular modes of transport (air, road
or rail) offer the contracting parties a possibility to bar
the seller from giving such new instructions to
the
carrier by providing the buyer with a particular original or
duplicate of the waybill. However, the documents used
instead of bills of lading for maritime carriage do not
normally contain such a barring function. The Comite
Maritime International has remedied this shortcoming of the
above-mentioned documents by introducing the 1990 Uniform
Rules for Sea Waybills” enabling the parties to insert a
“no-disposal” clause whereby the seller surrenders the right
to dispose of the goods by instructions to the carrier to
deliver the goods to somebody else or at another place than
stipulated in the waybill.
22. ICC
arbitration
Contracting parties who wish to have the possibility of
resorting to ICC Arbitration in the event of a dispute with
their contracting partner should specifically and clearly
agree upon ICC Arbitration in their contract or, in the
event that no single contractual document exists, in the
exchange of correspondence which constitutes the agreement
between them. The
fact of
incorporating one or more Incoterms in a contract or the
related correspondence does NOT by itself constitute an
agreement to have resort to ICC Arbitration.
The
following standard arbitration clause is recommended by ICC:
“All
disputes arising out of or in connection with the present
contract shall be finally settled under the Rules of
Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by one
or more arbitrators appointed in accordance with the said
Rules.”
EXW
EX WORKS
(...
named
place)
“Ex
works’ means that the seller delivers when he places the
goods at the disposal of the buyer at the seller’s premises
or another named place (i.e. works, factory, warehouse,
etc.) not cleared for export and not loaded on any
collecting vehicle.
This
term thus represents the minimum obligation for the seller,
and the buyer has to bear all costs and risks involved in
taking the goods from the seller’s premises.
However,
if the parties wish the seller to be responsible for the
loading of the goods on departure and to bear the risks and
all the costs of such loading, this should be made clear by
adding explicit wording to this effect in the contract of
sale. This term should not be used when the buyer cannot
carry out the export formalities directly or indirectly. In
such circumstances, the FCA term should be used, provided
the seller agrees that he will load at his cost and risk.
A
THE
SELLER’S OBLIGATIONS
Al Provision of goods in conformity with
the contract
The
seller must provide the goods and the commercial invoice, or
its equivalent electronic message, in conformity with e
contract of sale and any other evidence of conformity which
may be required by the contract.
A2
Licences, authorizations and formalities
The
seller must render the buyer, at the latter’s request, risk
a expense, every assistance in obtaining, where applicable,
any export licence or other official authorization necessary
for the export of the goods.
A3
Contracts of carriage and insurance
a)
Contract of carriage No obligation.
b) Contract of insurance No obligation.
A4
Delivery
The seller must place the goods at the disposal of the buyer
at the named place of delivery, not loaded on any collecting
vehicle, on the date or within the period agreed or, if no
such time is agreed, at the usual time for delivery of such
goods. If no specific point has been agreed within the named
place, and if there are several points available, the seller
may select the point at the place of delivery which best
suits his purpose.
A5
Transfer of risks
The
seller must, subject to the provisions of B5, bear all risks
of loss of or damage to the goods until such time as they
have been delivered in accordance with A4.
B
THE
BUYER’S OBLIGATIONS
B1 Payment of the price
The buyer
must pay the price as provided in the contract of sale.
B2
Licences, authorizations and formalities
The buyer
must obtain at his own risk and expense any export and
import licence or other official authorization and carry
out, where applicable all customs formalities for the export
of the goods.
B3
Contracts of carriage and insurance
a)
Contract of carriage No obligation.
b) Contract of insurance No obligation
B4
Taking delivery
The buyer
must take delivery of the goods when they have been
delivered in accordance with A4 and A7/B7.
B5
Transfer of risks
The buyer
must bear all risks of loss of or damage to the goods
• from the time they have been delivered in accordance with
A4; and
• from the agreed date or the expiry date of any period
fixed for taking delivery which arise because he fails to
give notice in accordance with B7, provided, however, that
the goods have been duly appropriated to the contract, that
is to say dearly set aside or otherwise identified as the
contract goods.
A6
Division of costs
The
seller must, subject to the provisions of B6, pay all costs
relating to the goods until such time as they have been
delivered in accordance with A4.
A7
Notice to the buyer
The
seller must give the buyer sufficient notice as to when and
where the goods will be placed at his disposal.
A8
Proof of delivery, transport document or equivalent
electronic message
No
obligations.
A9
Checking
-
packaging
-
marking
The
seller must pay the costs of those checking operations (such
as checking quality, measuring, weighing, counting) which
are necessary for the purpose of placing the goods at the
buyers disposal.
The
seller must provide at his own expense packaging (unless it
is usual for the particular trade to make the goods of the
contract description available unpacked) which is required
for the transport of the goods, to the extent that the
circumstances relating to the transport (for example
modalities, destination) are made known to the seller before
the contract of sale is concluded. Packaging is to be marked
appropriately.
Al0
Other obligations
The
seller must render the buyer at the latter’s request, risk
and expense, every assistance in obtaining any documents or
equivalent electronic messages issued or transmitted in the
country of delivery and/or of origin which the buyer may
require for the export and/or import of the goods and, where
necessary, for their transit through any country.
The
seller must provide the buyer, upon request, with the
necessary information for procuring insurance.
B6
Division of costs
The buyer
must pay
• all costs relating to the goods from the time they have
been delivered in accordance with A4, and
• any additional costs incurred by failing either to take
delivery of the goods when they have been placed at his
disposal, or to give appropriate notice in accordance with
B7 provided, however, that the goods have been duly
appropriated to the contract, that is to say, clearly set
aside or otherwise identified as the contract goods; and
• where applicable, all duties, taxes and other charges as
well as the costs of carrying out customs formalities
payable upon export.
The buyer must reimburse all costs and charges incurred by
the seller in rendering assistance in accordance with A2.
B7
Notice to the seller
The buyer
must, whenever he is entitled to determine the time within
an agreed period and/or the place of taking delivery, give
the seller sufficient notice thereof.
B8
Proof of delivery, transport document or equivalent
electronic message
The buyer
must provide the seller with appropriate evidence of having
taken delivery.
B9
Inspection of goods
The buyer
must pay the costs of any pre-shipment inspection, including
inspection mandated by the authorities of the country of
export.
B10
Other obligations
The buyer
must pay all costs and charges incurred in obtaining the
documents or equivalent electronic messages mentioned in A10
and reimburse those incurred by the seller in rendering his
assistance in accordance therewith.
FCA
FREE CARRIER (...
named
place)
Free Carrier” means that the seller delivers the goods,
cleared for export, to the carrier nominated by the buyer at
the named place. It should be noted that the chosen place of
delivery has an impact on the obligations of loading and
unloading the goods at that place. If delivery occurs at the
seller’s premises, the seller is responsible for loading. If
delivery occurs at any other place, the seller is not
responsible for unloading.
This term may be used irrespective of the mode of transport,
including multimodal transport.
“Carrier” means any person who, in a contract of carriage,
undertakes to perform or to procure the performance of
transport by rail, road, air, sea, inland waterway or by a
combination of such modes.
If the buyer nominates a person other than a carrier to
receive the goods, the seller is deemed to have fulfilled
his obligation to deliver the goods when they are delivered
to that person.
A
THE SELLER’S OBLIGATIONS
Al Provision of goods in conformity with
the contract
The
seller must provide the goods and the commercial invoice, or
its equivalent electronic message, in conformity with the
contract of sale and any other evidence of conformity which
may be required by the contract.
A2
Licences, authorizations and formalities
The
seller must obtain at his own risk and expense any export
licence or other official authorization and carry out, where
applicable
,
all
customs formalities necessary for the export of the goods.
A3
Contracts of carriage and insurance
a)
Contract of carriage
No obligation. However, if requested by the buyer or if it
is commercial practice and the buyer does not give an
instruction to the contrary in due time, the seller may
contract for carriage on usual terms at the buyer’s risk and
expense. In either case, the seller may decline to make the
contract and, if he does, shall promptly notify the buyer
accordingly.
b) Contract of insurance No obligation.
A4
Delivery
The
seller must deliver the goods to the carrier or another
person nominated by the buyer, or chosen by the seller in
accordance with A3 a), at the named place on the date or
within the period agreed for delivery.
Delivery is completed:
a) If the named place is the seller’s premises, when the
goods have been loaded on the means of transport provided by
the carrier nominated by the buyer or another person acting
on his behalf.
b) If the named place is anywhere other than a), when the
goods are placed at the disposal of the carrier or another
person nominated by the buyer, or chosen by the seller in
accordance with A3 a) on the seller’s means of transport not
unloaded.
If no specific point has been agreed within the named place,
and if there are several points available, the seller may
select the point at the place of delivery which best suits
his purpose.
Failing precise instructions from the buyer, the seller may
deliver the goods for carriage in such a manner as the
transport mode and/or the quantity and/or nature of the
goods may require.
B
THE BUYER’S OBLIGATIONS
B1 Payment of the price
The buyer
must pay the price as provided in the contract of sale.
B2
Licences, authorizations and formalities
The buyer
must obtain at his own risk and expense any import licence
or other official authorization and carry out, where
applicable all customs formalities for the import of the
goods and for their transit through any country
B3
Contracts of carriage and insurance
a)
Contract of carriage
The buyer must contract at his own expense for the carriage
of the goods from the named place. except when the contract
of carriage is made by the seller as provided for in A3 a)
b) Contract of insurance No obligation.
B4
Taking delivery
The buyer
must take delivery of the goods when they have been
delivered in accordance with A4.
A5
Transfer of risks
The
seller must, subject to the provisions of B5, bear all risks
of loss of or damage to the goods until such time as they
have been delivered in accordance with A4.
A6
Division of costs
The
seller must, subject to the provisions of B6, pay
• all costs relating to the goods until such time as they
have been delivered in accordance with A4; and
• where applicable, the costs of customs formalities as well
as all duties, taxes, and other charges payable upon export.
A7
Notice to the buyer
The
seller must give the buyer sufficient notice that the goods
have been delivered in accordance with A4. Should the
carrier fail to take delivery in accordance with A4 at the
time agreed, the seller must notify the buyer accordingly.
B5
Transfer of risks
The buyer
must bear all risks of loss of or damage to the goods
• from the time they have been delivered in accordance with
A4, and
• from the agreed date or the expiry date of any agreed
period for delivery which arise either because he fails to
nominate the carrier or another person in accordance with
A4, or because the carrier or the party nominated by the
buyer fails to take the goods into his charge at the agreed
time, or because the buyer fails to give appropriate notice
in accordance with B7, provided, however, that the goods
have been duly appropriated to the contract, that is to say,
clearly set aside or otherwise identified as the contract
goods.
B6
Division of costs
The buyer
must pay
• all costs relating to the goods from the time they have
been delivered in accordance with A4; and
• any additional costs incurred, either because he fails to
nominate the carrier or another person in accordance with A4
or because the party nominated by the buyer fails to take
the goods into his charge at the agreed time, or because he
has failed to give appropriate notice in accordance with B7,
provided, however, that the goods have been duly
appropriated to the contract, that is to say, clearly set
aside or otherwise identified as the contract goods; and
• where applicable, all duties, taxes and other charges as
well as the costs of carrying out customs formalities
payable upon import of the goods and for their transit
through any country.
B7
Notice to the seller
The buyer
must give the seller sufficient notice of the name of the
party designated in A4 and, where necessary, specify the
mode of transport, as well as the date or period for
delivering the goods to him and, as the case may be, the
point within the place where the goods should be delivered
to that party.
A8
Proof of delivery,
transport document or equivalent electronic message
The
seller must provide the buyer at the seller’s expense with
the usual proof of delivery of the goods in accordance with
A4,
Unless the document referred to in the preceding paragraph
is the transport document, the seller must render the buyer
at the latter’s request, risk and expense, every assistance
in obtaining a transport document for the contract of
carriage (for example a negotiable bill of lading, a
non-negotiable sea waybill, an inland waterway document, an
air waybill, a railway consignment note, a road consignment
note, or a multimodal transport document).
When the seller and the buyer have agreed to communicate
electronically, the document referred to in the preceding
paragraph may be replaced by an equivalent electronic data
interchange (EDI) message.
A9
Checking
-
packaging
-
marking
The
seller must pay the costs of those checking operations (such
as checking quality, measuring, weighing, counting) which
are necessary for the purpose of delivering the goods in
accordance with A4.
The seller must provide at his own expense packaging (unless
it is usual for the particular trade to send the goods of
the contract description unpacked) which is required for the
transport of the goods, to the extent that the circumstances
relating to the transport (for example modalities,
destination) are made known to the seller before the
contract of sale is concluded. Packaging is to be marked
appropriately.
Al 0
Other obligations
The
seller must render the buyer at the latter’s request, risk
and expense, every assistance in obtaining any documents or
equivalent electronic messages (other than those mentioned
in A8) issued or transmitted in the country of delivery
and/or of origin which the buyer may require for the import
of the goods and, where necessary, for their transit through
any country.
The seller must provide the buyer, upon request, with the
necessary information for procuring insurance.
B8 Proof
of delivery, transport document or equivalent electronic
message
The buyer
must accept the proof of delivery in accordance with A8.
B9
Inspection of goods
The buyer
must pay the costs of any pre-shipment inspection except
when such inspection is mandated by the authorities of the
country of export.
B10
Other obligations
The buyer
must pay all costs and charges incurred in obtaining the
documents or equivalent electronic messages mentioned in A10
and reimburse those incurred by the seller in rendering his
assistance in accordance therewith and in contracting for
carriage in accordance with A3 a).
The buyer must give the seller appropriate instructions
whenever the sellers assistance in contracting |