وبلاگ

 

1. 1. – P. Sarcevic & P. Volken 1986 , International Sale of Goods: Dubrovnik Lectures, Oceana 1986, www.cisg.law.pace.edu, p. 388. ↑

 

1. 1. – HR 26 May 1989, S&S 1989, 94 or NJ 1992, 105 (Zerstegen/Van der Harst). Sarcevic & Volken (eds) 1986, p. 388. ↑

 

1. 1. – Strikwerda 2004, p. 85 and 94-96; De Meij 2003, p. 88 et seq.; Haak 1998, p. 18. ↑

 

1. 1. – HR 5 January 2001, NJ 2001, 391 or S&S 2001, 61 (Overbeek/Cigna). ↑

 

1. 1. – See Parlementaire geschiedenis Boek 8, p. 1177. ↑

 

1. 1. – See for instance Rb Rotterdam 18 January 2009, ↑

 

1. 1. – see Rb Haarlem 15 October 2008, LJN BG1240. ↑

 

1. 1. – Rb Rotterdam 3 May 2006, S&S 2007, 114. ↑

 

1. 1. – Article 5(1) of the Rome I Regulation. ↑

 

1. 1. – Article 8:43(1) BW reads: “If the combined carrier is liable for the damages resulting from damage, total or partial loss, delay or any other damaging fact, and if it has not been ascertained where the fact leading thereto has arisen, his liability shall be determined according to the regime which applies to that stage or to those stages of the transport where this fact may have arisen and from which the highest amount of damages results.” ↑

 

1. 1. – Retchbank ↑

 

1. 1. – Rb Amsterdam 5 February 2003, S&S 2003, 86. Another example is OLG Frankfurt 23 December 1992,TranspR 1993, p. 103 et seq. ↑

 

1. 1. – See Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2.3 on ‘unlocalized loss’. ↑

 

1. 1. – Van Beelen 1996, p. 143. ↑

 

1. 1. – OLG Hamburg 16 May 2002, TranspR 2002, p. 355-357; Hof Den Haag 26 November 1996, S&S 1998, 61; Rb Rotterdam 28 October 1999, S&S 2000, 35. ↑

 

1. 1. – F.W.H. Chan, J.J. M. Ng & B. K. Y. Wong, 2002, Shipping and Logistics Law: Principles and Practice in Hong Kong, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press 2002. ↑

 

1. 1. – The air carriage convention did not apply for instance in OLG Karlsruhe 21 February 2006, TranspR 2007, p. 203-209. ↑

 

1. 1. – OLG Hamburg 16 May 2002, TranspR 2002, p. 355-357. ↑

 

1. 1. – Langenhagen ↑

 

1. 1. – BGH 30 March 2006, TranspR 2006, p. 250-254. ↑

 

1. 1. – Likewise OLG Karlsruhe 21 February 2006, TranspR 2007, p. 203-209. ↑

 

1. 1. – Article 5(1) Rome I Regulation. ↑

 

1. 1. – Hof Den Bosch 2 November 2004, S&S 2006, 117 under 4.5. ↑

 

1. 1. – بر اساس ماده ۳۱ CMR ↑

 

1. 1. – F. Ferrari, 2004 ‘Interpretation of the Convention and gap-filling: Article 7’, in: F. Ferrari, H. Flechtner & R.A. Brand (eds.), The Draft UNCITRAL Digest and Beyond, Sellier: München 2004,, p. 170; K.F. Haak, 1986 The liability of the carrier under the CMR (diss. Utrecht), Den Haag: Stichting Vervoeradres 1986, p. 19. ↑

 

1. 1. – Clarke CMR 2003, p. 12. ↑

 

1. 1. – Buchanan and Co. Ltd. v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (U.K.) Ltd., [1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 119. ↑

 

1. 1. – Clarke cites Rix LJ in Andrea Merzario v Leitner, [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 490. Clarke CMR 2003, p. 13. ↑

 

1. 1. – Haak, op.cit, 1986, p. 17 and 19. ↑

 

1. 1. – Clarke Gaps ۲۰۰۶ ▪ M.A. Clarke, National Judges Facing Gaps in the CMR : British Case-law’, ULR ۲۰۰۶,, p. 633. see also Fothergill v Monarch Airlines Ltd., [1980] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 295, [1981] AC 251. Buchanan and Co. Ltd. v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (U.K.) Ltd., [1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 119. See also Haak 1986, p. 30-31. ↑

 

1. 1. – J. Tunn, 1996 ‘Rechtsstellung des Empfängers im Frachtrecht’, TranspR ۱۹۹۶,, p. 405. ↑

 

1. 1. – F. Fischer, 1996 ‘Internationale Umzugstransporte auf der Straße’, TranspR ۱۹۹۶,, p. 409; I. Koller, 2007, Transportrecht, München: Beck 2007, p. 1127,Article 1 CMR, No. 5; Brandi-Dohrn 1996, p. 57. ↑

 

1. 1. – J. Kropholler, 1975, Internationales Einheitsrecht, Tübingen: Mohr 1975, p. 292. ↑

 

1. 1. – Koller op.cit, p. 1127, Article 1 CMR, No. 5. ↑

 

1. 1. -. de Meij, 2003, Samenloop van CMR-Verdrag en EEX-Verordening (diss. Groningen), Groningen: Kluwer 2003, p. 45-46. ↑

 

1. 1. – Hof Den Bosch 2 November 2004, S&S 2006, 117 under 4.5. ↑

 

1. 1. – Ibid ↑

 

1. 1. – Koller Ibid, p. 361-363. ↑

 

1. 1. – Ibid. ↑

 

1. 1. – Rb Haarlem 6 July 1999, S&S 2000, 88. ↑

 

1. 1. – Currently Article 5(1) of the Rome I Regulation. ↑

 

1. 1. – Article 29 MC – or the exclusivity of certain specifically named Articles of the Convention – Article 24 WC. ↑

 

1. 1. – Abnett (known as Sykes) v British Airways Plc. & Sidhu v British Airways Plc., [1997] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 76. Hope LJ referred to the Warsaw Convention as amended at The Hague in 1955 in this decision. ↑

 

1. 1. – Ibid. ↑

 

1. 1. – I. Koning, 2007, Aansprakelijkheid in het luchtvervoer (diss. Rotterdam), Zutphen: Paris 2007, p. 308 fn. 50; Dempsey & Milde 2005 ▪ S. Dempsey & M. Milde, International Air Carrier Liability: The Montreal Convention of 1999, Montreal: McGill University, Centre for Research in Air and Space Law ۲۰۰۵, p. 124-134; Eastern Airlines, Inc v Floyd, 499 U.S. 530 (1991). ↑

 

1. 1. – Abnett (known as Sykes) v British Airways Plc. & Sidhu v British Airways Plc., [1997] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 76. See also B.C. Rowan, 2008 ‘Caution, your civil liberties may have shifted during the flight’, WUGSLR ۲۰۰۸,, p. 178. ↑

 

1. 1. – El Al Israel Airlines Ltd. v Tsui Yuan Tseng, 525 U.S. 155, 1999 S.Ct. 662 or 1999 WL 7724 or 67 U.S.W.L. 4036. For a German summary and analysis see Schmid 2000, p. 74. ↑

 

1. 1. – Koning Ibid, p. 312. ↑

 

1. 1. – Ibid. ↑

 

1. 1. – Article 29 CMNI is unique in that none of the other carriage conventions contain such a provision. P. Mankowski, 2008 ‘Entwicklungen im Internationalen Privat- und Prozessrecht für Transportverträge in Abkommen und speziellen EG-Verordnungen’, TranspR ۲۰۰۸,, p. 178. ↑

 

1. 1. – HR 28 November 2008, S&S 2009, 24; NJ 2008, 623 and HR 28 November, S&S 2009, 25; NJ 2008, 624. See also Haak NTHR 2009, p. 85-97. ↑