Skip to main content

Ex-ship contract.

                                          Ex-Ship Contracts 

Ex-ship contracts means without shipment costs to the consignee until receipt overside of the shipment at destination, the consignee being required to accept delivery at the ship's side and assume all subsequent liability. I.e the seller has to delivery the goods to the buyer at the port of destination. In such contracts the property in the goods does not pass until actual delivery. The goods are at the seller's risk during the voyage. It is  therefore, for the seller to insure the goods to protect his interest. The seller is to pay the freight, or otherwise release the ship owner's lien and to furnish the buyer with a delivery order or an effectual direction to the ship owner to deliver.

    In this case ex-ship, the seller has to cause delivery to be made by the buyer from a ship which has arrived at the port of delivery, and has reached the usual place of delivery therein for the discharged pf the goods of the kind in question.

      Here the seller saves costs on shipping and customs, along with liability for damaged goods after being delivered, packaged, and labeled at the shipping terminal.

Example of Ex-ship contract- Seller X ships contracted goods to a pier and port in Kennebunkport, Maine. Midway there, the ship encounters a storm and sinks. Seller X absorbs the loss because the shipment has not yet arrived in port.


Duties of seller include:

1. deliver goods to the buyer after the arrival of the ship at the port of delivery at a place where such goods are usually delivered. 

2. to pay the freight, or otherwise to release the shipowners lien.

 3. to furnish the buyer effective delivery order.

Duty of buyer includes:

1. Here buyer is not bound to pay the price of the goods until the seller has done his part.

     The goods are at the sellers risk to the voyage. The seller is not bound to ensure the goods on the buyers behalf. The parties may however vary the conditions of the above shipping contract by express terms. The liability Under an ex ship can be the risk of loss passes to the buyer once the goods leave the ship. It is not always possible to save cost on shipping and customs along with liability of goods, due to customs requirements in certain jurisdictions.

       There is also delivery Ex-ship contract which is an outdated incoterms rule which has been replaced by DAP and DAT. DES means a seller has fulfilled a delivery agreement when the goods are delivered to the port specified by a buyer. The seller only bears the risks and costs related to the delivery from the point of origin to the named port.

     When the goods arrive at the buyer’s named port, the risks and costs are shifted to him. At that time forward, the buyer pays for all custom duties and is responsible for clearing the goods.

        Lastly Seller fulfills the Contract obligations  when the goods have been made available to the buyer on board a ship at the named port of destination. The seller must bear all costs and risks associated in bringing the goods to the named port of destination. The buyer is responsible for all costs necessary to unload the goods and clear them through customs. Unloading costs are included the ocean freight charged by most ship lines. The DES is most often used for charter shipments.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree