Inaug.-Diss.--Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen. / Vita. Bibliography: p. 467-495 (1st group); p. 172-197 (2d group).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 100-103).

Thesis (M.S. in Mechanical Engineering)--Naval Postgraduate School, December 2002. / Thesis advisor(s): Fotis A. Papoulias. Includes bibliographical references (p. 61). Also available online.

Thesis (D. Miss.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 192-200).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 100-103) Also available in print.

Project (D. Miss.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1988. / Title from start screen (viewed Aug. 19, 2004). "5 July 2004." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 192-200).

Thesis (D. Miss.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 192-200).

Thesis (M.Phil.)--Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 53-54). Also available in electronic version.

Texte remanié de: Th. Ph. D.--University of London, 1961. / Bibliogr. p. 243-249. Index.

International multimodal transport continues to grow exponentially, while the relevant international legal framework becomes increasingly fragmented and complex. The establishment of a widely acceptable uniform international legal framework for multimodal transport contracts has proven to be extremely difficult, in spite of the various attempts initiated by some international organizations. Owing to the increasing use of containers to consolidate cargo, multimodal transport practice has become inevitable in the field of international trade based on its numerous advantages over the traditional unimodal carriage practices. Therefore, the urgent need of an internationally legal instrument to govern liability issues arising from multimodal carriage transactions is highly requested by trading parties. This research, however, present the difficulties involve when trying to establish liability issues arising from multimodal carriage claims and the impact it has on contracting parties who are never certain on which regime their contracts are based, instead depends on already existing unimodal liability regimes to sort out their disputes. The strengths and weaknesses of the two most recent attempts at producing a uniform legal regime for multimodal transport namely: The United Nations Convention on International Multimodal Transport of Goods 1980 (The UN Convention of 1980) and The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea (The Rotterdam Rules) are also examined in this research as none of these attempts appears to be a tenable solution. However, in the absence of a truly accepted international uniform legal regime for multimodal transport contracts, some nations, regional and sub-regional laws and regulations on multimodal transport contracts have been initiated. Despite the recognition of the Rotterdam Rules in certain jurisdictions, it will probably fail to achieve the aim of uniformity as intended because it’s merely a “maritime-plus” Convention. With the continuous development of containerization, there is an imperative need to have a multimodal transport convention which is broad enough in scope to govern the rights and liabilities of all parties in a multimodal carriage contracts, including inland carriers and their contractors or sub-carriers (referred to as performing parties) in the new Convention.