Cargo theft continues to blight the international supply chain, giving rise to disruption, unpredictability and widespread financial exposures. Whilst there are obvious commercial impacts, the loss of cargo and ensuing insurance claims for example, studies continue to develop a greater understanding of the overall impact of cargo theft, both economic and societal. It is widely believed that organised criminal gangs are often the orchestrators of cargo theft and that the proceeds inevitably support other illicit trades.
The logistics world is fraught with potential risks, and claims are perhaps inevitable. The exposure to such claims can be minimised, however, by maintaining a robust risk mitigation policy. Risk mitigation extends not only to the physical steps taken to improve operational safety and security, but also to ensuring, from the outset, that adequate contractual protections are in place.
This case highlights the importance of careful drafting in order to communicate terms and conditions to customers and suppliers and to ensure that they are sufficiently wide to cover extra-contractual services where necessary and appropriate.
The consequences of clandestine migration are more than geo-political. In the freight supply chain the impacts include the activities of governmental border enforcement agencies, as well as the risks of contamination and damage to goods. Care is required for all the risks involved.
The smuggling of people has unfortunately become a major issue in certain parts of the world. Political imperatives in target countries have led stricter immigration restrictions and increased government action. International clandestine migration has become a persistent threat to the unitised supply chain.
It may be frustrating where proceedings are commenced but not followed-through in a reasonable time-frame. English law articulates three requirements before a claim may be struck out and this judgment clarifies that all three must be satisfied.
The announcement of another fire on board a container ship early in January 2020 - the first publicised this year - reinforce the vital importance of increasing rigour around the transport of dangerous goods (and not just by sea).
The importance of implementing robust due diligence procedures, incorporating all aspects of your business, cannot be underestimated as key risk mitigation. If something appears too good to be true, then it probably is.
1 January 2020 will witness the introduction of Incoterms® 2020. Revised every ten years, in common with previous editions, this latest revision has been assessed against current business practices, taking into account new technologies and challenges faced through the intervening period.
Incorporation of Incoterms into a sale contract will not bind any third party, or govern any other contract. It remains for the seller or buyer to ensure that the agreed Incoterm correctly reflects the reality for finance, carriage and insurance. Start with the end in mind!
It is perhaps surprisingly common for things to go wrong in the processes around berthing ships, particularly in terms of manoeuvring in the port area and mooring. Aimed at the ship/port interface, read on to understand TT Club's experience and ways to mitigate the risks.
Recent case law from the NSW Court of Appeal in Australia acts as a reminder to freight forwarders to consider carefully the question of 'whether to issue a house bill of lading?' for a consignment. When doing so, there are clear steps to take to protect the rights of all stakeholders and avoid unforeseen exposures.
