Benny was asked by Carlos to make all shipping arrangements; though it is the buyer’s obligation to make such arrangements under FOB contract. ‘Under an FOB sale, the buyer is responsible for making the arrangements for shipping the goods to their destination’. Thus, it had to be Carlos’ obligation to make all shipping arrangements with him being the buyer of the goods. Moreover, according to the FOB contract law, the seller is not under a duty to ship the goods until he has received shipment instructions from the buyer; thus Benny was not obliged to arrange any shipment without Carlos giving him the necessary instructions. It should be added, that this is the Buyer’s responsibility to arrange the shipment of goods to the port of destination. . The two cases were destroyed during loading at the port; it is necessary to find out who is responsible for these losses. According to s 20 of the Sale of Goods 1979, risk passes with property and in FOB sales risk passes along with property upon shipment – that is, when the goods pass the ship’s rail.
Cite this document
(“Trade Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/326436-trade-law
(Trade Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words)
“Trade Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/326436-trade-law.
Cited: 0 times
The aim of the paper is to consider the case described in the task and to analyze it through the issues which have arisen in the case; it is essential to apply FOB trade law statements to find the solutions to each issue of the case.
The risk of loss rules determines whether the seller may still recover for the price of the goods or whether the buyer must pay for the goods and take delivery, despite the fact that the goods are totally destroyed.
Due to the ever increasing complexity of the global economy, as well as the need for checks and balances to ensure that international business and trade are conducted in an ethical and beneficial manner, international organizations have rose to prominence which were created in an effort to serve as arbiters in commerce and trade disputes that cross the boundaries of nations, oceans and continents.
Both laws also define the liabilities, duties and rights of the three parties in maritime trade i.e. shipper, the common carrier and the consignee. Both set up international rules for the carriage of goods by sea for the purpose of regulating maritime activities and resolving maritime disputes between the aforesaid parties.
The underlying principle is that goods that are lawfully marketed in One Member State may also be marketed in all other Member States of the Union. This is known as mutual recognition. However the products should be free from defects irrespective of member states of origin.
As for the present issue, under a classic FOB contract it is stated that the Seller has to deliver the goods to the destination specified in the contract, but his duties finish as soon as he puts the goods across the ship's rail; however it is not clear through the case, whether Sammy delivered the goods to the port of Cardiff, or to the port of Newport; in the first case there would be no issues and the conditions of the FOB contract law are followed; in the second case the seller had the right to refuse to deliver the goods to another port.
Headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, the primary objective of the WTO is to help trade flow smoothly, freely, fairly and predictably. At its heart are the WTO agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of the worlds trading nations and ratified in
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was created by the US and its allies after the Second World War. Its creation was an answer to the disruptions of trade that happened during the Great Depression and during World War II. The GATT was signed in 1948 and was considered as an after war opening of trade liberation in the World.