Rufa case 2023 551
In reality
There might be a lot of them
Contract signed for payment
The consignee pays no freight
To whom should the carrier claim right at this time
(figure source network hacking)
Briefing
In march 2023, the third man, the handsome, bought a piece of wood from the defendant peng, and agreed to transport the timber to t-town. The defendant, peng, published information on the need for the carriage of goods in an application where the plaintiff, xiao hua, took orders from the software platform and agreed on a freight rate of $9,600. At the same time, the “other agreement” in the electronic order paid freight to the recipient, and the transport vehicle was not allowed to deliver the goods if the freight was not paid. After the agreement was reached, the plaintiff xiaohua arranged for its driver to carry the shipment to t-town。
After the arrival of the goods, the third man, the young man, had a dispute with the defendant, peng, over the quality of the timber at the time of the examination, and the two had no agreement. As neither the handsome nor peng paid the freight charges, the plaintiff, xiao hua soo, appealed to the court to legally order peng to pay the cost of the carriage of the goods and the loss of the stoppage, as well as interest, and to hold the third person, the handsome, jointly and severally liable for the cost of the shipment and the loss of the stoppage。
Court hearings
The court found that the original and the defendant had formed a contractual relationship for the carriage of goods, that the carrier of the contract of carriage was xiaohua, the shipper was peng, the consignee was handsome, the goods were logs and the freight was $9,600. The plaintiff, xiaohua, delivered the timber to t-town at the request of the defendant, peng. According to article 523 of the civil code of the people's republic of china: “if the parties agree that a third person shall perform the debt to the creditor, and the third party fails to do so or does not comply with the agreement, the debtor shall be liable to the creditor for default”. The defendant, peng, was required to pay $9,600 to the plaintiff, xiaohua, for refusing to pay the freight。
(c) a request for joint and several liability from xiaohua, the plaintiff. Although it was agreed in the original agreement for the carriage of goods by the defendant that “the receiving party shall pay the freight, and the transport vehicle may not deliver the goods if the freight is not paid”, the court did not support the claim that xiaohua had joint and several responsibility for the freight, in accordance with the principle of contract relativity, that the agreement would not be effective as against a third person. As for the dispute between the handsome and peng, there was another legal relationship in which separate rights could be claimed。
The defendant, peng xiao, was then sentenced to pay $9,600 in freight and interest to the plaintiff, and to dismiss his other claims。
The judge's statement
The contract of carriage is the contract by which the carrier transports the passenger or the goods from the place of embarkation to the agreed place and the passenger, shipper or consignee pays the bill or the cost of the transport. The parties shall conduct their civil activities in accordance with the principle of good faith and shall determine their obligations fairly and reasonably。
Normally, there are two agreed modes of payment of freight, freight prepaid and freight paid in the contract of carriage. Where freight is prepaid, the shipper is about to pay the carrier the freight before the carriage commences. In the case of freight payment, although the contract of delivery provided for payment of freight by the consignee, the contract was relative and bound only the parties. As a party to the contract of carriage, the shipper is legally obliged to pay freight. It is clear from article 523 of the civil code of the people's republic of china that, as a third party to the contract, the performance of the consignee's obligation to pay is not compulsory from the agreement of the shipper and the carrier. If the consignee refuses to pay freight to the carrier, it is not liable for breach of contract, but for breach by the shipper。
Judge alert
For a long time, the transportation of goods has been carried by drivers seeking transport information through web platforms, etc., consultations on the location of the shipment, destination, unit price, etc., and the entire journey has been conducted by telephone, wi-fi, no shipper has been seen and no written contract has been signed, and upon arrival the driver has also contacted the consignee by telephone or wi-fi, often passive in the event of a dispute arising out of an oral contract. Drivers of trucks are reminded to enter into written contracts to identify important information such as shippers, settlements and so forth, if conditions permit. In the absence of the terms of a written contract, care must also be taken to preserve shipping documents, bills of lading, overpounds, micro-links, telephone conversations, etc。
