Notre intention est d’effectuer une étude comparative du contrat de transport de marchandises en droit français et en droit chinois, principalement entre le droit positif français et le droit positif chinois en matière maritime, sans omettre les nombreuses interférences des Conventions internationales en vigueur dans ce domaine. Le contrat de transport maritime de marchandises est conclu entre le chargeur et le transporteur qui va assurer leur acheminement au moyen d’un navire sur un élément naturel non exempt de dangers, la mer, l’objet du contrat étant l’acte de transport. Ce contrat est généralement couvert par un type spécifique, le connaissement, mais il n’est pas un document unique. Parmi les spécificités du connaissement, la clause Paramount, la clause de compétence et la clause compromissoire insérées dans le document seront examinées car elles forment le socle juridique du transport maritime.L’exécution de ce contrat dépend des droits et des obligations de chaque partie que nous détaillerons. La mise du navire en état de navigabilité, l’accomplissement du voyage et la livraison sont à la charge du transporteur qui recevra en contrepartie le paiement du fret de la part du chargeur. Cependant les risques spécifiques de la navigation en mer génèrent certains problèmes qui recevront des réponses particulières. Ainsi par exemple, la responsabilité du transporteur pleine ou partielle, les cas exceptés, la limitation à l’indemnisation des dommages, etc. L’exécution de ce contrat entraîne parfois des litiges. Pour chaque affaire, il y a lieu de déterminer qui est la partie responsable du dommage subi par la marchandise. En fait, il n’est pas toujours simple de définir la responsabilité de chacun. Il est fait parfois appel à l’arbitrage international ou il sera parfois nécessaire d’avoir recours à la justice.Or s’agissant souvent de contentieux mettant en présence plusieurs entreprises (armateur, gestionnaire du navire, chargeur, transporteur, destinataire, assureur, banquier, etc.) relevant de divers États avec des systèmes juridiques différents, plusieurs questions complexes devront être résolues : les conditions de recevabilité de l’action, la compétence du tribunal, la loi applicable, etc.Parmi les particularités, nous observerons que la France a ratifié la Convention de Bruxelles, et les Protocoles modificatifs de 1968 et 1979, tandis que la Chine n’a ratifié aucun de ces textes. En droit international, la France applique le système moniste selon lequel les Conventions internationales ratifiées s’appliquent immédiatement en droit interne, alors que selon le dualisme, les Conventions n'acquièrent de force juridique qu'après avoir été transposées en droit interne. La Chine n’applique ni le système moniste, ni le système dualiste, tout en donnant à la Convention internationale une force supérieure à la loi interne, mais sous certaines conditions.Avec les moyens modernes de fabrication et de communication, la planète est devenue un village dont les membres échangent sans cesse des biens et des services. Dans cette évolution, le commerce international en général et le transport des marchandises par mer en particulier ont beaucoup progressé. L’étude comparative du contrat de transport maritime en France, pays de droit ancien du vieux continent, et en Chine, riche d’un passé culturel et d’une économie contemporaine florissante, nous est apparue intéressante et utile : outre sa participation aux échanges culturels entre ces deux pays, force est de constater que se poursuivent la mondialisation de l’économie et la progression concomitante des échanges internationaux de marchandises par mer. / The purpose of this dissertation is to carry out a comparative study of the contract for the carriage of goods by sea in French law and in Chinese law, principally between French positive maritime law and Chinese positive maritime law, taking into consideration as well the numerous influences which international Conventions currently in force bear on this issue.The contract for the carriage of goods by sea is concluded between a shipper and a carrier. The transportation of the goods by the carrier involves the navigation of a ship through water, a natural element which is not without danger; the act of the transportation of the goods therefore involves certain risks, and it is this act of transportation which is the object of the contract.This contract is generally modelled after the standard form of a Bill of Lading, though that is not the only document which is used. Among the specific elements of a Bill of Lading, the Paramount clause, the jurisdiction clause and the arbitration clause inserted in the document will each be examined, because they form the legal base of maritime transport.The execution of the contract, considering the rights and obligations of each of the parties, will be examined in detail. Assuring that the ship is in sound navigating condition, carrying out the voyage and accomplishing the delivery of the cargo are the responsibilities of the carrier, who in return will receive payment for these services from the shipper.However, the particular risks inherent in sea travel engender particular problems which will be specifically addressed – for example, the exact extent of responsibility of the carrier; the cases in which an exception might be made; amount limitations to the indemnities for damages, etc.The practical application of the contract to a specific situation will sometimes lead to disputes. In each case it needs to be determined which is the party that is responsible for the damage to the cargo. In fact, it is not always easy to define the responsibilities of each party. Sometimes appeal is made to international arbitration, and at other times it will be necessary to appeal in a court of law.Since the disputes often involve several separate enterprises (the ship owner, the ship manager, the shipper, the carrier, the recipient, insurance companies, bankers, etc.) coming from diverse countries with judicial systems which differ from one another, a number of complex legal issues must be resolved: the conditions of admissibility of the action, the jurisdiction of court, applicable law, etc.Among the particularities, we observe that France ratified the Brussels Convention and the modifying Protocols of 1968 and 1979, whereas China did not ratify any of these documents. In international law, France applies the monist system, according to which the ratified International Conventions are immediately applied in internal law, although according to dualism, the Conventions do not acquire legal force until after having been transposed into internal law. China applies neither the monist system nor the dualist system, while granting to the International Convention a superior authority over internal law, though only under certain conditions.With modern means of production and communication, the planet has become a global village whose members continually exchange goods and services. This development has led to significant growth in international commerce in general, and to significant growth in the transport of merchandise by sea in particular; hence the importance of this study.

An increase in international trade has resulted in an increase in the carriage of goods by sea, which has also promoted the business of marine insurance on a very huge scale. Marine insurance contracts fall within both the admiralty jurisdiction where admiralty laws apply and special contract law where the rules and principles of contract law apply. In certain circumstance this has left the courts with a dilemma in deciding in particular cases which law should apply; whether maritime law, contract law or marine insurance law. There are certain principles under the law of contract that are said to be profound and cannot be ousted easily by substantive law. The principle of party autonomy is one of these principles and it has gained international recognition through a number of cases. However, to date, courts are faced with difficulties in deciding whether to uphold the choice of law on jurisdiction and governing law exercised by parties or resort to substantive law, either by virtue of admiralty law or any other statutes in a country, which provisions may be contrary to the clause on choice of law under the contract. In South Africa practice has shown that courts are always reluctant to apply the clause on choice of law if they believe such application is against the public policy and interest in South Africa. This begs the question as to the precise meaning and effect of “public policy and interest” and how this principle influences the long-standing and well-established principle of party autonomy in admiralty jurisdiction. This dissertation is aimed at providing a legal response to this problem by analysing case law and the different viewpoints of various writers. It is imperative to investigate if their decisions and views answer all the uncertainties with regard to the meaning and the effect of the concept of “public policy and interest” on the principle of party autonomy. / LLM (Import and Export Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

An increase in international trade has resulted in an increase in the carriage of goods by sea, which has also promoted the business of marine insurance on a very huge scale. Marine insurance contracts fall within both the admiralty jurisdiction where admiralty laws apply and special contract law where the rules and principles of contract law apply. In certain circumstance this has left the courts with a dilemma in deciding in particular cases which law should apply; whether maritime law, contract law or marine insurance law. There are certain principles under the law of contract that are said to be profound and cannot be ousted easily by substantive law. The principle of party autonomy is one of these principles and it has gained international recognition through a number of cases. However, to date, courts are faced with difficulties in deciding whether to uphold the choice of law on jurisdiction and governing law exercised by parties or resort to substantive law, either by virtue of admiralty law or any other statutes in a country, which provisions may be contrary to the clause on choice of law under the contract. In South Africa practice has shown that courts are always reluctant to apply the clause on choice of law if they believe such application is against the public policy and interest in South Africa. This begs the question as to the precise meaning and effect of “public policy and interest” and how this principle influences the long-standing and well-established principle of party autonomy in admiralty jurisdiction. This dissertation is aimed at providing a legal response to this problem by analysing case law and the different viewpoints of various writers. It is imperative to investigate if their decisions and views answer all the uncertainties with regard to the meaning and the effect of the concept of “public policy and interest” on the principle of party autonomy. / LLM (Import and Export Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

Cette étude porte sur la question de l’efficacité de la convention d’arbitrage à l’égard des opérateurs du transport maritime de marchandises. Dans un premier temps, la question qui se pose est celle de la détermination du droit applicable à l’efficacité de ladite clause. A cet égard, notre attention se concentre sur l’interprétation et l’application des principes propres à l’arbitrage international par la jurisprudence maritime. L’examen des clauses d’arbitrage insérées dans un contrat de transport maritime ne saurait échapper aux spécificités du droit de transport maritime ainsi qu’aux dispositions des conventions maritimes internationales. Par ailleurs, l’approche du sujet par la méthode comparative nous permettra de découvrir, à travers les solutions concrètes finalement retenues dans les trois systèmes juridiques en question, que l’effet juridique de la clause compromissoire est directement lié à l a position contractuelle de ces opérateurs. Parmi les personnes impliquées dans le transport maritime, le destinataire des marchandises nous intéresse plus particulièrement. Ce dernier n’étant pas présent, en effet, au moment de la formation du contrat, les conditions de son engagement par une clause compromissoire insérée, presque toujours « par référence » dans le titre de transport, font l’objet d’un vif débat doctrinal et jurisprudentiel. / This study is primarily focused on the enforceability of arbitration agreements incorporated in contracts of carriage of goods by sea. First, we will cover the important issue of determining the law applicable to these arbitration agreements. Special attention will be given to how courts tend to implement general international arbitration principles to maritime disputes. An arbitration agreement incorporated in acontract of carriage of goods by sea should also be analyzed in light of the specificities of maritime transport law and applicable international shipping conventions. Moreover, the comparative methodology used herein will show that the enforceability of arbitration agreements is closely related to the qualification of the operators involved in the contract. In particular, among the commercial players involved in the carriage of the goods, we sought to examine the legal position of the consignee of the goods. Indeed, since the consignee is absent at the moment of the contract formation, the binding effect there upon of the arbitration agreement, which is generally incorporated “by reference” to the bill of lading, is highly debated by scholars and judges.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:21:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 MarianaGama.pdf: 821073 bytes, checksum: 402b9864ba857f81db2e8321d820abb4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005-10-18 / The legal basis of the contract of carriage of goods by sea is the main object of the present work. The choice of this topic was influenced by the great importance that it presents and by the little prominence that the current Brazilian doctrine grants to it. Furthermore, due to the increase of the Brazilian exportation, the subject-matter is each time more appreciated by the national courts. In the present work were considered not only rules of domestic law, mainly represented by the Civil Code of 2002, but also principles of international law represented by two international conventions about the subject: the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading (Brussels Convention, of 1924), and the United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea (the Hamburg Rules, of 1978). Certain rules of comparative law had also been indicated mainly when the subject is not regulated by the domestic legal system. Finally, it was made an analysis of two other kinds of economic exploitation of the ship: the chartering contract (time and voyage charter) and the bare boat charter, comparing them to the contract of carriage of goods by sea, and although they present some contact points with the contract, they differ from it. / O regime jurídico do contrato de transporte de mercadorias por via marítima é o principal objeto de estudo do presente trabalho. A escolha do tema foi influênciada pela grande importância que apresenta e devido ao pouco destaque que a doutrina brasileira atual lhe concede. Ademais, em função do aumento das exportações brasileiras, a matéria é cada vez mais apreciada pelos tribunais nacionais. No presente ensaio foram abordadas não somente as normas de direito interno, representadas principalmente pelo Código Civil de 2002, mas também as normas de direito internacional, consubstanciadas em duas convenções internacionais sobre a matéria: a Convenção Internacional para a Unificação de Certas Regras em Matéria de Conhecimentos (Convenção de Bruxelas, de 1924) e a Convenção das Nações Unidas para o Transporte de Mercadorias por Mar (Regras de Hamburgo, de 1978). Foram também indicados dispositivos de direito comparado, principalmente quando a matéria não for abordada pelo ordenamento jurídico pátrio. Por fim, foi feita uma análise de outras duas formas de exploração econômica do navio: o contrato de afretamento (por tempo e por viagem) e a locação, confrontando-as com o contrato de transporte marítimo de mercadorias, que, embora apresentem alguns pontos de contato, não se confundem com o contrato, objeto de comparação.