门到门运输下承运人责任研究
摘要
门到门运输在国际货物运输中的比重越来越高,如何调整门到门运输下承运人责任问题变得越来越重要。随着《运输法草案》的制定,调整门到门运输下承运人责任出现三大模式,传统的多式联运承运人责任模式、单式公约加合同安排下的承运人责任模式和《运输法草案》下承运人的责任模式。这三大模式在调整门到门运输下承运人责任问题上各有优缺点,分别加以详细的论述。同时通过对三大模式的冲突与协调进行深入分析,尤其是对责任期间、责任形式等问题进行深入的研究,总结出《运输法草案》模式下将责任期间延伸为门到门的合理性,以及采用最小网状责任制的好处。提出对修改我国《海商法》关于承运人责任规定的建议,以使我国《海商法》在调整国际货物运输上更能满足当前国际形势,满足贸易发展的需要。
Since the emergence and development of carriage in containers, which has been almost a half of century, the form of carriage of international goods by sea has evolved from port to port to door to door, and carrier begins to provide the door to door services. So in such circumstances, it becomes necessary to do research combining the tradional carriage by sea and other forms of carriage. For so many years, there is no one uniform international convention governing the multimodel transport, at the same time, as for the carriage of goods by sea,“the Hague Rules”,“the Hague-Visby Rules”and“the Hamburg Rules”,are all the three conventions which have came into force. The differences of the three conventions lead to the arise of lots of legal conflicts, which therefore become the development obstacles of international trade and navigation economy. In the sphere of carriage of goods, it is becoming a trend to make a uniform Transportion Law, the“Draft of Transportion Law”drawn by UNCITEAL is such an effort to attempt to unify the recent conflicted laws on international transport to meet the urgent need of door to door carriage. Thereby, further research on the liabilities of carrier of door to door carriage, including comparative analyses on conflicts and harmonization of the three kinds of modes of door to door carriage ,which includes the liability mode of traditional multimodel carrier, the liability mode of carrier under the arrangement of contract and convention, and the liability mode of carrier of the“Draft of Transportion Law”, will help to amend the Maritime Law about the liabilities of carrier.
My prensent endeavour is to research the carrier’liabilities of door to door carriage under the whole system of carrier’liabilities ,which will help to lay down a set of reasonable and effective liability system ,and to solve the recent conflicts of laws. This paper put emphasis on analyzing and discussing the liability period and forms of carrier, and some other relevant problems in the way of comparing the character, analyzing the respective existing problems, researching the conflicts and harmonization of the three modes of door to door carriage. Last but not least, I will try to bring up some reasonable advices to solving the extisting problems on the basis of legislative status quo home and abroad. This paper separates from three parts to observe.
The outline of this paper follows:
The first part will introduce the recent three modes governing the carrier’liability of door to door carriage, the liability mode of traditional multimodel carrier, the liability mode of carrier under the arrangement of contract and convention, and the liability mode of carrier of the“Draft of Transportion Law”, and will elaborate the undertaking of liabilities of carrier and the exsiting problems under the three modes repectively. Under the responsibility mode of traditional multimodel carrier, my endeavour in this prensent is the liability forms of multimodel carrier, and will introduce three forms: responsibility sharing system, the network liability system ,the uniform liability system, and in conclusion point out the most problem of this mode——the loss of international uniform law. The liability mode of carrier under the arrangement of contract and convention is the common usage governing the carrier’s liability of door to door carriage, there are three international conventions under this mode——“the Hague Rules”,“the Hague-Visby Rules”and“the Hamburg Rules”, but there are quite different rugulations on carrier’s liability. The conflicts of the conventions arise many problems, at the same time, the carrier’s liability ususlly involves the application of domestic laws before loading and after discharging, so this will lead to the application conflicts between domestic laws and conventions and conventions themselies. This part’s points is observing the undertaking of carrier’s responsibility under the mode of“the Draft Transportion Law”, and will briefly introduce the background, scope of application, period of liability, and the form of liability of the draft, and then examine the least network of liability and confirm the reasonability of the period of liability.
The second part of the essay: analyzing the conflicts and the co-ordinations of the three modes. The essay also focuses on the three areas of the conflicts and the co-ordinations in three levels. First, it is the stipulated conflict and co-ordination of the liability period. It points out the stipulations for the carrier of the liability period in the“the Hague Rules”,“The Hague - Visby Rules”,“Hamburg Rules”,“transport draft law”and China's“CMC”. It also shows that it is the best way in the background of the“draft transport law”, to extend the liability period of the carrier to door-to-door scale to clarify the responsibility of the carrier and is suitable for the current international good transportation. It is also the best approach to co-ordinate the conflicts of the liability period. Secondly, it describes the conflict and the co-ordination of the carrier’s responsibility on a single transportation rule. Especially it expounds the stipulations of the“transport draft law”, and the co-ordination problems of the“CMR”,“COTIF”and“CMNI”, Last it analyzes the international transport of goods between the three parties that the cargo, door-to - Gate carrier and the issues of the co-ordination taken by the between the performing parties liability . It shows which choice is more reasonable and more suitable for the fact in the basis of the summarization of the analysis of the possible conflicts and how to coordinate in the three modes.
The third part of the essay: the section is the focus of the essay. In the basis of the former analysis and comparison, it gives the suggestions of the stipulations of the carrier’s responsibility“CMC”of China. It first analyzes the present conditions of China’s“CMC”, interprets the several existing problems of China’s“CMC”and expounds the necessities to revise the law from the perspective of the limitation of the scope of the“CMC”and the existing defect of the“CMC”,in order to make it suitable for the new international conditions ,also to make it helpful for the development of our international trading and the maritime economy. The essay proposes three suggestions in the aspect of revising the carrier responsibility of the“CMC”. First , enlarging the scope of the“CMC”to avoid its limitation, and making it can also adjust the river transport. Second, increasing the segment of the port terminal operators responsibility in order to stipulate the principle of liability, limitation of liability of the operator’s liability period. Third, deleting the duplicate contents in the“content law”to safeguard the unity of the legal system and reduce conflicts of laws.
The purpose of the discussion of the essay is to clarify the carrier responsibility under the door-to-door transport better and protect the interests of the international transport of goods parties more equitable and reasonable. The essay combines the characteristics of the international transport of goods and makes the comparisons and the analysis of the relevant existing international conventions and different national laws . It takes a research on the carrier liability from a liability system level and draws a conclusion in the basis of the research .It also makes an attempt exploration to the revision of China’s“CMC”in order to attract more scholars to concern on the problems of the carrier liability under the door-to-door transport and to put forth to a reasonable solution as early.
Since the emergence and development of carriage in containers, which has been almost a half of century, the form of carriage of international goods by sea has evolved from port to port to door to door, and carrier begins to provide the door to door services. So in such circumstances, it becomes necessary to do research combining the tradional carriage by sea and other forms of carriage. For so many years, there is no one uniform international convention governing the multimodel transport, at the same time, as for the carriage of goods by sea,“the Hague Rules”,“the Hague-Visby Rules”and“the Hamburg Rules”,are all the three conventions which have came into force. The differences of the three conventions lead to the arise of lots of legal conflicts, which therefore become the development obstacles of international trade and navigation economy. In the sphere of carriage of goods, it is becoming a trend to make a uniform Transportion Law, the“Draft of Transportion Law”drawn by UNCITEAL is such an effort to attempt to unify the recent conflicted laws on international transport to meet the urgent need of door to door carriage. Thereby, further research on the liabilities of carrier of door to door carriage, including comparative analyses on conflicts and harmonization of the three kinds of modes of door to door carriage ,which includes the liability mode of traditional multimodel carrier, the liability mode of carrier under the arrangement of contract and convention, and the liability mode of carrier of the“Draft of Transportion Law”, will help to amend the Maritime Law about the liabilities of carrier.
My prensent endeavour is to research the carrier’liabilities of door to door carriage under the whole system of carrier’liabilities ,which will help to lay down a set of reasonable and effective liability system ,and to solve the recent conflicts of laws. This paper put emphasis on analyzing and discussing the liability period and forms of carrier, and some other relevant problems in the way of comparing the character, analyzing the respective existing problems, researching the conflicts and harmonization of the three modes of door to door carriage. Last but not least, I will try to bring up some reasonable advices to solving the extisting problems on the basis of legislative status quo home and abroad. This paper separates from three parts to observe.
The outline of this paper follows:
The first part will introduce the recent three modes governing the carrier’liability of door to door carriage, the liability mode of traditional multimodel carrier, the liability mode of carrier under the arrangement of contract and convention, and the liability mode of carrier of the“Draft of Transportion Law”, and will elaborate the undertaking of liabilities of carrier and the exsiting problems under the three modes repectively. Under the responsibility mode of traditional multimodel carrier, my endeavour in this prensent is the liability forms of multimodel carrier, and will introduce three forms: responsibility sharing system, the network liability system ,the uniform liability system, and in conclusion point out the most problem of this mode——the loss of international uniform law. The liability mode of carrier under the arrangement of contract and convention is the common usage governing the carrier’s liability of door to door carriage, there are three international conventions under this mode——“the Hague Rules”,“the Hague-Visby Rules”and“the Hamburg Rules”, but there are quite different rugulations on carrier’s liability. The conflicts of the conventions arise many problems, at the same time, the carrier’s liability ususlly involves the application of domestic laws before loading and after discharging, so this will lead to the application conflicts between domestic laws and conventions and conventions themselies. This part’s points is observing the undertaking of carrier’s responsibility under the mode of“the Draft Transportion Law”, and will briefly introduce the background, scope of application, period of liability, and the form of liability of the draft, and then examine the least network of liability and confirm the reasonability of the period of liability.
The second part of the essay: analyzing the conflicts and the co-ordinations of the three modes. The essay also focuses on the three areas of the conflicts and the co-ordinations in three levels. First, it is the stipulated conflict and co-ordination of the liability period. It points out the stipulations for the carrier of the liability period in the“the Hague Rules”,“The Hague - Visby Rules”,“Hamburg Rules”,“transport draft law”and China's“CMC”. It also shows that it is the best way in the background of the“draft transport law”, to extend the liability period of the carrier to door-to-door scale to clarify the responsibility of the carrier and is suitable for the current international good transportation. It is also the best approach to co-ordinate the conflicts of the liability period. Secondly, it describes the conflict and the co-ordination of the carrier’s responsibility on a single transportation rule. Especially it expounds the stipulations of the“transport draft law”, and the co-ordination problems of the“CMR”,“COTIF”and“CMNI”, Last it analyzes the international transport of goods between the three parties that the cargo, door-to - Gate carrier and the issues of the co-ordination taken by the between the performing parties liability . It shows which choice is more reasonable and more suitable for the fact in the basis of the summarization of the analysis of the possible conflicts and how to coordinate in the three modes.
The third part of the essay: the section is the focus of the essay. In the basis of the former analysis and comparison, it gives the suggestions of the stipulations of the carrier’s responsibility“CMC”of China. It first analyzes the present conditions of China’s“CMC”, interprets the several existing problems of China’s“CMC”and expounds the necessities to revise the law from the perspective of the limitation of the scope of the“CMC”and the existing defect of the“CMC”,in order to make it suitable for the new international conditions ,also to make it helpful for the development of our international trading and the maritime economy. The essay proposes three suggestions in the aspect of revising the carrier responsibility of the“CMC”. First , enlarging the scope of the“CMC”to avoid its limitation, and making it can also adjust the river transport. Second, increasing the segment of the port terminal operators responsibility in order to stipulate the principle of liability, limitation of liability of the operator’s liability period. Third, deleting the duplicate contents in the“content law”to safeguard the unity of the legal system and reduce conflicts of laws.
The purpose of the discussion of the essay is to clarify the carrier responsibility under the door-to-door transport better and protect the interests of the international transport of goods parties more equitable and reasonable. The essay combines the characteristics of the international transport of goods and makes the comparisons and the analysis of the relevant existing international conventions and different national laws . It takes a research on the carrier liability from a liability system level and draws a conclusion in the basis of the research .It also makes an attempt exploration to the revision of China’s“CMC”in order to attract more scholars to concern on the problems of the carrier liability under the door-to-door transport and to put forth to a reasonable solution as early.
引文
1.胡正良、赵阳:《国际多式联运经营人责任制度研究》,《大连海事大学学报》2002 年 6 月第 1 卷,第 1—2 期,第 7 页。
2.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版,第 193 页。
3.贺万忠:《国际货物多式运输法律问题研究》,法律出版社 2002 年 1月版,第 56 页。
4.Alexander von Ziegler(郭雪莹、张可欣、于阳译):《国际海上运输领域统一法律的必要性以及对 CMI 和 UNCITRAN 的挑战》,《中国海商法年刊》2000 年卷,第 86 页。
5.单红军等:《浅析承运人的“责任期间”》,《中国海商法年刊》2002 年卷,大连海事大学出版社 2003 年第 1 版,第 55 页。
6.参见赵伟:《承运人的责任制度》,上海海事大学 2005 年硕士学位论文,第 2 页。
7.《合同法》和《货规》亦适用于我国内陆水域货物运输合同。《货规》第 2 条规定:“中华人民共和国沿海、江河、湖泊以及其它通航水域中从事的营业性水路货物运输适用于本规则。内河托航视为水路货物运输,适用本规则。”
8.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版,第 102 页。
9.有学者主张,参照有关海上货物运输的国际公约、其他国家如美国、比利时等国法律的规定,《海商法》应适当规定第四章的强制适用范围,即在一定范围内(如我国出口运输或者进口运输),不允许合同当事人选择合同适用其他国家的法律。参见:胡正良:《<海商法>修改的必要性、应遵循的原则和要点之研究》,《海事司法论坛》2002年第 4 期,第 22 页。
10.尹东年、郭瑜:《海上货物运输法》,法律出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第118 页。
11.田聿新:《国际集装箱货物多式联运组织与管理》,大连海事大学出版社 1999 年第 1 版, 第 118 页。
12.胡正良、赵阳:《国际多式联运经营人责任制度研究》,《大连海事大学学报》2002 年 6 月第 1 卷,第 1—2 期,第 7 页。
13.参见赵伟:《承运人的责任制度》上海海事大学 2005 年硕士学位论文,第 13 页。
14.《公路货运公约》的限额是每公斤 8.33 特别提款权,《铁路运输公约》的限额是每公斤 17 特别提款权,《蒙特利尔公约》和《华沙公约》与此相同,《汉堡规则》的限额是每公斤 2.5 特别提款权,或每件 835特别提款权。
15.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版,第 1 页。
16. 陈小云、屈广清著:《当代国际法问题研究》,知识产权出版社 2007年 7 月第 1 版,第 263 页。
17.郑蕾:《现代国际海上货物运输承运人责任制度研究》,法律出版社2000 年第 1 版,第 689 页。
18.因为在我国,运输公司要开展多式联运业务,必须遵守原外贸部《国际货运代理业管理规定》及其《实施细则》,申领“国际货运代理”资格证书,接受外经贸部的行业管理。在这一点上与后来铁道部与交通部联合颁发的《国际集装箱多式联运规则》所规定的资质管理有冲突。鉴于此,笔者在此也将外贸部的管理规定也列在我国的多式联运法律体系中了。
19.贺万忠:《国际货物多式运输法律问题研究》,法律出版社 2002 年第1 版,第 521 页。
20.张梅生:《对我国<海商法>若干问题的评述》, 法律出版社 2007 年第 1 版,第 261 页 。
21.参见司玉琢、胡正良:《谈我国<海商法>修改的必要性》,《中国海商法年刊 》,大连海事大学出版社 2002 年版,第 1-9 页。
22.朱曾杰:《国际海事法规的动向》,《中国远洋航务报告》2003 年第 1期,第 69 页。
23.许俊强:《论承运人责任制度的改进》,《中国海事审判年刊》2001年卷,第 22 页。
24.1978 年 10 月 26 日交通部《关于港口作业事故处理的几项规定(施行)》、1979 年 9 月 13 日交通部《关于港口作业事故处理的几项补充规定》。
1.杨运涛:《多式联运与物流服务的发展》,《中国航运周刊》2004年第 6 期。
2.朱曾杰:《国际海事法规的动向》,《中国远洋航务公告》2003 年第 1 期。
3.胡正良、赵阳:《国际多式联运经营人责任制度研究》,《大连海事大学学报》2002 年第 1 期。
4.单红军等:《浅析承运人的“责任期间”》,《中国海商法年刊》2002年 5 月卷。
5.许俊强:《论承运人责任制度的改进》,《中国海事审判年刊》2001年卷。
6.郭瑜:《论我国<海商法>中实际承运人制度的修改和完善》,《海商法研究》2000 年第 3 辑。
7.Alexander von Ziegler(郭雪莹、张可欣、于阳译):《国际海上运输领域统一法律的必要性以及对 CMI 和 UNCITRAN 的挑战》,《中国海商法年刊》2000 年卷 00 期。
8.郑蕾:《现代国际海上货物运输承运人责任制度研究》,《民商法论丛》,2000 年第 15 卷。
9.傅延中:《关于国际货物多式联运的若干法律问题》,《海运世界》2000 年第 3 期。
10.朱曾杰:《论海上货物运输法的国际统一》,《海商法研究》1999年第 1 辑。
11.杨永辉:《对多式联运经营人责任制度产生与发展之研究》,《青岛远洋船员学院学报》1997 年第 4 期。
12.胡正良等:《论国际海上货物承运人责任原则的采用》,《中国海商法年刊》1991 年卷。
13.郭志刚:《三个海运提单公约的比较研究》,《中国海商法年刊》1991 年 00 期。
1.陈小云、屈广清著:《当代国际法问题研究》, 知识产权出版社 2007年 7 月第 1 版。
2.司玉琢:《海商法专论》,中国人民大学出版社 2007 年 1 月第 1 版。
3.张永坚译:《国际海商法》,法律出版社 2005 年 12 月第 1 版。
4.饶中享:《海事应用法学研究》,湖北人民出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
5.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版。
6.司玉琢、胡正良主编:《<中国人民共和国海商法>修改建议稿条文、参考立法例、说明》,大连海事大学出版社 2003 年第 1 版。
7.朱曾杰等译:《现行国际多式联运法规概览——多式联运规则的实施》人民交通出版社 2002 年第 1 版。
8.司玉琢:《国际海事立法趋势及对策研究》,法律出版社 2002 年 1月第 1 版。
9.贺万忠著:《国际货物多式运输法律问题研究》,法律出版社 2002年 1 月第 1 版。
10.杨志刚编著:《国际集装箱多式联运实务与法规》,人民交通出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
11.尹东年、郭瑜著:《海上货物运输法》,人民法院出版社 2000 年 9月第 1 版。
12.田聿新主编:《国际集装箱多式联运组织与管理》,大连海事大学出版社 1999 年第 1 版。
13.王利明、崔建远:《合同法新论》,中国政法大学出版社 1999 年 6月第 1 版。
14.司玉琢、胡正良著:《海商法详论》,大连海事大学出版社 1995 年10 月第 1 版。
15.朱清:《新编海上法学参考资料选编》,大连海运学院出版社 1991年第 1 版。
1.杨运涛:《国际多式联运法律关系研究》,对外经贸大学 2006 年博士学位论文。
2.赵伟:《承运人的责任制度》,上海海事大学 2005 年硕士学位论文。
2.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版,第 193 页。
3.贺万忠:《国际货物多式运输法律问题研究》,法律出版社 2002 年 1月版,第 56 页。
4.Alexander von Ziegler(郭雪莹、张可欣、于阳译):《国际海上运输领域统一法律的必要性以及对 CMI 和 UNCITRAN 的挑战》,《中国海商法年刊》2000 年卷,第 86 页。
5.单红军等:《浅析承运人的“责任期间”》,《中国海商法年刊》2002 年卷,大连海事大学出版社 2003 年第 1 版,第 55 页。
6.参见赵伟:《承运人的责任制度》,上海海事大学 2005 年硕士学位论文,第 2 页。
7.《合同法》和《货规》亦适用于我国内陆水域货物运输合同。《货规》第 2 条规定:“中华人民共和国沿海、江河、湖泊以及其它通航水域中从事的营业性水路货物运输适用于本规则。内河托航视为水路货物运输,适用本规则。”
8.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版,第 102 页。
9.有学者主张,参照有关海上货物运输的国际公约、其他国家如美国、比利时等国法律的规定,《海商法》应适当规定第四章的强制适用范围,即在一定范围内(如我国出口运输或者进口运输),不允许合同当事人选择合同适用其他国家的法律。参见:胡正良:《<海商法>修改的必要性、应遵循的原则和要点之研究》,《海事司法论坛》2002年第 4 期,第 22 页。
10.尹东年、郭瑜:《海上货物运输法》,法律出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第118 页。
11.田聿新:《国际集装箱货物多式联运组织与管理》,大连海事大学出版社 1999 年第 1 版, 第 118 页。
12.胡正良、赵阳:《国际多式联运经营人责任制度研究》,《大连海事大学学报》2002 年 6 月第 1 卷,第 1—2 期,第 7 页。
13.参见赵伟:《承运人的责任制度》上海海事大学 2005 年硕士学位论文,第 13 页。
14.《公路货运公约》的限额是每公斤 8.33 特别提款权,《铁路运输公约》的限额是每公斤 17 特别提款权,《蒙特利尔公约》和《华沙公约》与此相同,《汉堡规则》的限额是每公斤 2.5 特别提款权,或每件 835特别提款权。
15.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版,第 1 页。
16. 陈小云、屈广清著:《当代国际法问题研究》,知识产权出版社 2007年 7 月第 1 版,第 263 页。
17.郑蕾:《现代国际海上货物运输承运人责任制度研究》,法律出版社2000 年第 1 版,第 689 页。
18.因为在我国,运输公司要开展多式联运业务,必须遵守原外贸部《国际货运代理业管理规定》及其《实施细则》,申领“国际货运代理”资格证书,接受外经贸部的行业管理。在这一点上与后来铁道部与交通部联合颁发的《国际集装箱多式联运规则》所规定的资质管理有冲突。鉴于此,笔者在此也将外贸部的管理规定也列在我国的多式联运法律体系中了。
19.贺万忠:《国际货物多式运输法律问题研究》,法律出版社 2002 年第1 版,第 521 页。
20.张梅生:《对我国<海商法>若干问题的评述》, 法律出版社 2007 年第 1 版,第 261 页 。
21.参见司玉琢、胡正良:《谈我国<海商法>修改的必要性》,《中国海商法年刊 》,大连海事大学出版社 2002 年版,第 1-9 页。
22.朱曾杰:《国际海事法规的动向》,《中国远洋航务报告》2003 年第 1期,第 69 页。
23.许俊强:《论承运人责任制度的改进》,《中国海事审判年刊》2001年卷,第 22 页。
24.1978 年 10 月 26 日交通部《关于港口作业事故处理的几项规定(施行)》、1979 年 9 月 13 日交通部《关于港口作业事故处理的几项补充规定》。
1.杨运涛:《多式联运与物流服务的发展》,《中国航运周刊》2004年第 6 期。
2.朱曾杰:《国际海事法规的动向》,《中国远洋航务公告》2003 年第 1 期。
3.胡正良、赵阳:《国际多式联运经营人责任制度研究》,《大连海事大学学报》2002 年第 1 期。
4.单红军等:《浅析承运人的“责任期间”》,《中国海商法年刊》2002年 5 月卷。
5.许俊强:《论承运人责任制度的改进》,《中国海事审判年刊》2001年卷。
6.郭瑜:《论我国<海商法>中实际承运人制度的修改和完善》,《海商法研究》2000 年第 3 辑。
7.Alexander von Ziegler(郭雪莹、张可欣、于阳译):《国际海上运输领域统一法律的必要性以及对 CMI 和 UNCITRAN 的挑战》,《中国海商法年刊》2000 年卷 00 期。
8.郑蕾:《现代国际海上货物运输承运人责任制度研究》,《民商法论丛》,2000 年第 15 卷。
9.傅延中:《关于国际货物多式联运的若干法律问题》,《海运世界》2000 年第 3 期。
10.朱曾杰:《论海上货物运输法的国际统一》,《海商法研究》1999年第 1 辑。
11.杨永辉:《对多式联运经营人责任制度产生与发展之研究》,《青岛远洋船员学院学报》1997 年第 4 期。
12.胡正良等:《论国际海上货物承运人责任原则的采用》,《中国海商法年刊》1991 年卷。
13.郭志刚:《三个海运提单公约的比较研究》,《中国海商法年刊》1991 年 00 期。
1.陈小云、屈广清著:《当代国际法问题研究》, 知识产权出版社 2007年 7 月第 1 版。
2.司玉琢:《海商法专论》,中国人民大学出版社 2007 年 1 月第 1 版。
3.张永坚译:《国际海商法》,法律出版社 2005 年 12 月第 1 版。
4.饶中享:《海事应用法学研究》,湖北人民出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
5.司玉琢主编:《海商法》,法律出版社 2003 年 7 月第 1 版。
6.司玉琢、胡正良主编:《<中国人民共和国海商法>修改建议稿条文、参考立法例、说明》,大连海事大学出版社 2003 年第 1 版。
7.朱曾杰等译:《现行国际多式联运法规概览——多式联运规则的实施》人民交通出版社 2002 年第 1 版。
8.司玉琢:《国际海事立法趋势及对策研究》,法律出版社 2002 年 1月第 1 版。
9.贺万忠著:《国际货物多式运输法律问题研究》,法律出版社 2002年 1 月第 1 版。
10.杨志刚编著:《国际集装箱多式联运实务与法规》,人民交通出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
11.尹东年、郭瑜著:《海上货物运输法》,人民法院出版社 2000 年 9月第 1 版。
12.田聿新主编:《国际集装箱多式联运组织与管理》,大连海事大学出版社 1999 年第 1 版。
13.王利明、崔建远:《合同法新论》,中国政法大学出版社 1999 年 6月第 1 版。
14.司玉琢、胡正良著:《海商法详论》,大连海事大学出版社 1995 年10 月第 1 版。
15.朱清:《新编海上法学参考资料选编》,大连海运学院出版社 1991年第 1 版。
1.杨运涛:《国际多式联运法律关系研究》,对外经贸大学 2006 年博士学位论文。
2.赵伟:《承运人的责任制度》,上海海事大学 2005 年硕士学位论文。