• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.377-401
• /
• 1999

This study is focused on the privity of the contract of carriage of goods by sea, so to speak, privity between B/L holder and carrier by transfer of bill of lading, privity by attornment to delivery order and conflict between bills of lading and charterparty terms. Under a CIF contract, possession of the bill of lading is equivalent to possession of the goods, and delivery of the bill of lading to the buyer or to a third party may be effective to pass the property in the goods to such person. The bill of lading is a document of title enabling the holder to obtain credit from banks before the arrival of the goods, for the transfer of the bill of lading can operate as a pledge of the goods themselves. In addition, it is by virtue of the bill of lading that the buyer or his assignee can obtain redress against the carrier for any breach of its terms and of the contract of carriage that it evidences. In other words the bill of lading creates a privity between its holder and the carrier as if the contract was made between them. The use of delivery orders in overseas sales is commen where bulk cargoes are split into more parcels than there are bills of lading, and this practice gives rise to considerable difficulties. For example, where the holder of a bill of lading transferred one of the delivery orders to the buyer who presented it to the carrier and paid the freight of the goods to which the order related, it was held that there was a contract between the buyer and the carrier under which the carrier could be made liable in repect of damage to the goods. The contract was on the same terms as that evidenced by, or contained in, the bill of lading, which was expressly incorporated by reference in the delivery order. If the transferee of the delivery order presents it and claims the goods, he may also be taken to have offered to enter into an implied contract incorporating some of the terms of the contract of carriage ; and he will, on the carrier's acceptance of that offer, not only acquire rights, but also incur liabilities under that contract. Where the terms of the charterparties conflict with those of the bills of lading, it is interpreted as below. First, goods may be shipped in a ship chartered by the shipper directly from the shipowner. In that case any bill of lading issued by the shipowner operates, as between shipowner and charterer, as a mere receipt. But if the bill of lading has been indorsed to a third party, between that third party and carrier, the bill of lading will normally be the contract of carriage. Secondly, goods may be shipped by a seller on a ship chartered by the buyer for taking delivery of the goods under the contract of sale. If the seller takes a bill of lading in his own name and to his own order, the terms of that bill of lading would govern the contractual relations between seller and carrier. Thirdly, a ship may be chartered by her owner to a charterer and then subchartered by the chaterer to a shipper, to whom a bill of lading may later be issued by the shipowner. In such a case, the bill of lading is regarded as evidencing a contract of carriage between the shipowner and cargo-owners.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.11 no.7
• /
• pp.2358-2370
• /
• 2010

This research aims to empirically analyze the factors that affect the success of technology marketing by Korean universities. The total of 207 universities which successfully made technology transfers from 2006 to 2008 was examined to test the nine hypotheses. For the purpose of testing the hypotheses, technology infrastructure (research costs and the number of SCIE papers), the compensation system for the patents (application and registration), the number of patents (application and registration), TLO staff (the number of people in charge of technology transfer and the job experience in industries), the compensation system for technology transfers (researchers and contributors), and attitudes of university management and industries were analyzed with structural equation methods to figure out their effects on the revenues of technology transfer. The results of this research are summarized as follows. First, technology infrastructures of universities were found to have positive effects on securing patents. As the university research costs in the field of science and technology are increases, the research capabilities are enhanced and this a larger number of researchers are conducted. Second, this research shows that compensation systems for patent application and registration in universities have motivated researchers to take out patents for the outputs of their research. Third, the number of patents universities possess was found to have a positive effect on technology transfer. An increase in the number of patents universities possess implies an increase in the diversity and excellence of the target technologies for transfer. Fourth, the number of patents universities possess turned out to have a positive effect on TLO staff. The number of experts in charge of technology transfer including technology dealers, valuation analysis and patent attorneys should be increased as target technologies for transfer increase according to the increase of patents possessed. Because the technologies are transferee from universities to businesses, businesses (job) experience of TLO staff in industries are also important. This research is meaningful because it has identified the factors affecting the results of technology transfer by employing structural equation methods. In particular, an official governmental survey data for the academic-industrial cooperation were analyzed systematically in terms of technology infrastructure, compensation systems related to patents, the number of patents, TLO staff, compensation systems for technology transfer, and attitudes of university management and industries. All these facts might could differentiate this study from the previous studies.