《新版国际贸易术语解释通则.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《新版国际贸易术语解释通则.doc（23页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、精品文档，仅供学习与交流，如有侵权请联系网站删除 新版国际贸易术语解释通则1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INCOTERMS .2. WHY REVISIONS OF INCOTERMS? .3. INCOTERMS 2000 .4. INCOPRORATION OF INCOTERMS INTO THE CONTRACT OF SALE 5. THE STRUCTURE OF INCOTERMS 6. TERMINOLOGY .7. THE SELLERS DELIVERY OBLIGATIONS .8. PASSING OF RISKS AND COSTS RELATING
2、 TO THE GOODS 9. THE TERMS 10. THE EXPRESSION NO OBLIGATION .11. VARIANTS OF INCOTERMS .12. CUSTOMS OF THE PORT OR OF A PARTICULAR TRADE 13. THE BUYERS OPTIONS AS TO THE PLACE OF SHIPMENT 14. CUSTOMS CLEARANCE 15. PACKAGING .16. INSPECTION OF GOODS .17. MODE OF TRANSPORT AND THE APPROPRIATE 18. THE
3、RECOMMENDED USE .19. THE BILL OF LADING AND ELECIRONIC COMMERCE .20. NON NEGOTIABLE TRANSPORT DOCUMENTS INSTEAD OF BILLS OF LADING .21. THE RIGHT TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CARRIER 22. ICC ARBITRATION .1.PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INCOTERMS The purpose of Incoterms is to provide a set of international ru
4、les 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 tra
5、ding 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 th
6、e 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 he stressed that the scope of Incoterms i
7、s 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
8、. First, Incoterms 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, Incoterm
9、s deal only with the relation between sellers and buyers under the contract of sale, and, moreover, only do so in some very distinct respects.Nevertheless, the parties agreement to use a particular Incoterms, would necessarily implications for the other contracts. To mention a few examples, a having
10、 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 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, -&c docume
11、nt required under a documentary credit would necessarily depend upon the means of transport intended to he used.Second, Incoterms deal with a number of identified obligations imposed on the parties - such as the sellers obligation to place the goods at the disposal of the buyer or hand them over for
12、 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 buyers obligation to take delivery as well as the obligation to provide proof
13、that the respective obligations have been duly fulfil1ed. Although Incoterms 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
14、 of contract and the consequences following from such breaches m 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
15、 or by individually negotiated terms.Generally,Incoterms do not deal with the consequences of breach of contractand any exemptions from liability owing to various impediments. These questions must he resolved by other stipulations in tile contract of sale and tile applicable law.Incoterms have alway
16、s 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 A
17、2 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 revi
18、sion the term Free Carrier (now FCA) was introduced m order to deal with the frequent case where the reception point in maritime trade was no longer the traditional FOB ?point (passing of the ships rail) but rather a point on land, prior to loading on board a vessel, where the goods were stowed into
19、 a container for subsequent transport by sea or by different means of transport in combination (so ? called combined or multimodel transport).Further, in the 1990 revision of Incoterms, the clauses dealing with the sellers obligation to provide proof of delivery permitted a replacement of paper docu
20、mentation 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, w
21、hich 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 revi
22、sion 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 apperar to have effected few changes. It is clear, however, that Incoterms no
23、w 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, substantiv
24、e 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 rega
25、rd 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. INCOPRORATION 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
26、parties intend to incorporate Incoterms into their contract of sale, an express reference is always made to the current version of Incoterms. 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 merchant
27、s. 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 Incot
28、erms 2000.5. THE STRUCTURE OF INCOTERMS In 1990, for case 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 sellers own premises (the E ? term Ex works); followed by the
29、 second group 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
30、due to events occurring after shipment and dispatch (CFR, CIF, CPT 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 tra
31、de terms.INCOTERMS 2000Group EDepartureEXWEx Works( . named place)Group FMain carriage unpaid FCA Free Carrier ( . named place) FAS Free Alongside Ship ( . named port of shipment) FOB Free On Board ( . named port of shipment) Group CMain carriage paid CFR Cost and Freight ( . named port of destinati
32、on) CIF Cost, Insurance and Freight ( . . . named place of destination) CPT Carriage paid To ( . named port of destination) CIP Carriage and Insurance Paid To( . named port of destination)Group DArrival DAF Delivered At Frontier ( . named place) DES Delivered Ex Ship ( . named port of destination) D
33、EQ 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, m in Incoterms 1990, the respective obligations of the parties have been grouped under 10 he where each headi
34、ng on the seller, 8 side mirrors, the position of the buyer with respect to the same subject matter.6. TERMINOLOGYWhile drafting Incoterms 2000, considerable efforts have been made to achieveas much consistency as possible and desirable with respect to the various expressions used throughout the thi
35、rteen terms. Thus, the use of different expressions intended to convey the same meaning has been avoided. Also, wheneverpossible, the same expressions as appear in the 1980 UN Convention on Cont? for the International Sale of Goods ( CISG) have been used Shipper In some cases it has been necessary t
36、o use the same term to express two different meanings simply because there has been no suitable alternative. Traders will he 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
37、 over the goods for carriage and the person who makes the contract with the carder: however, these two shippers may he 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 par
38、ticularly 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
39、 buyers 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
40、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 d
41、elivery of the goods and to receive them from the carder 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 carder or, alternatively, the buyer might have to pay demurrage charges resting upon the goods in order to obtain
42、 the carriers 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 goo
43、ds 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 m the contract of sale, he would he able to use an
44、y remedies which the contract of sale and the applicable law gave him against the seller, matters which, as has already been mentioned, he entirely outside the scope of Incoterms.Where appropriate, Incoterms 2000 have used the expression placing the goods at the disposal X the buyer when the goods a
45、re made available to the buyer at a particular place. This expression is intended to bear the same meaning as that of the phrase landing 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 examp
46、le 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, he 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 he the guiding fight. In this sense, the word usual is rather more helpful than the word reasonable which requires an assessment not against the worl