ROTTERDAM KURALLARI’NIN MULTİMODAL TAŞIMALARA MÜTEALLİK UYGULAMA ALANI

Öz

Günümüzde, kapıdan kapıya taşıma sözleşmeleri tarifeli (liner) taşıma uygulamasında giderek önem kazanmaktadır. Fakat multimodal taşımaları düzenleyen bir uluslararası hukuki rejimin eksikliği sebebiyle, bu tür sözleşmeler mevcut uluslararası düzenlemelerin uygulama alanı dışında kalmaktadır. Rotterdam Kuralları, uygulama alanını deniz yolu ile yapılan taşımaların yanı sıra bir deniz yolculuğunun öncesinde veya sonrasında kara, demir yolu, iç suyolları ve hava yolları gibi diğer taşıma modları ile gerçekleşen taşıma faaliyetlerini de içerecek şekilde genişleterek, kapıdan kapıya taşıma sözleşmelerini de kapsamayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaca ulaşmak için, Rotterdam Kuralları uygulama alanına girecek sözleşmelerde herhangi bir şekil şartı aramamakta ve son derece esnek bir taşıma sözleşmesi tanımını esas almaktadır. Bu niteliklerin bir sonucu olarak, mevcut tarifeli taşıma seferlerine ilişkin pek çok navlun sözleşmesinin Konvansiyon’un uygulama alanı içerisine gireceğini söylemek mümkün olacaktır. Bununla beraber, uygulamada taşıyanın yükü uygun gördüğü taşıma türü veya metodu ile taşıma serbestisine haiz olduğu, modu belirlenmemiş taşıma sözleşmesi olarak adlandırılabilecek taşıma sözleşmelerine de rastlanmaktadır. Konvansiyonun birinci maddesinin ilk fıkrası bu tür sözleşmelerin Rotterdam Kuralları’nın uygulama alanına girip girmediği konusunda yeterince açık değildir. Bu makalede, Konvansiyon’un hazırlık aşamasındaki tartışmalar ışığında, sadece sözleşme açık veya zımni bir biçimde deniz taşımasını öngördüğü sürece bu tür sözleşmelerin Rotterdam Kuralları madde 1.1’in kapsamı içinde değerlendirilmesi gerektiği görüşü savunulmaktadır. Her ne kadar, Rotterdam Kuralları’nın bu meseleyi açıkça düzenlemiş olması çok daha yerinde olacaksa da, kanımızca yukarıda anılan görüş madde 1.1’in lafzına ve ruhuna en uygun düşen yorumdur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Rotterdam Kuralları, Uygulama Alanı, Kapıdan Kapıya Taşıma Sözleşmeleri

ROTTERDAM RULES’ SCOPE OF APPLICATION IN THE CONTEXT OF MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT

Öz

Door to door transport contracts are becoming increasingly prevalent in modern liner transport. However, these contracts are largely falling outside the ambit of existing international legal instruments, in the absence of an international legal regime specifically governing multimodal transport. The Rotterdam Rules intend to change the status quo by extending their application to door to door transport, covering not only the sea voyage but also the carriage by another mode preceding or following the sea voyage under a contract of carriage. To realize this goal, the Convention omits documentary requirements and adopts a flexible definition for the contract of carriage. This ensures that the most liner contracts currently being used will fall within the ambit of the Convention, including those concluded on door to door basis. However, there are also certain contracts of carriage, referred as non-mode-specified carriage contracts, under which the carrier is entitled to choose the method or the mode of carriage. The language of article 1.1 does not elaborate whether these type of contracts would also fall within the ambit of the Convention. In light of the preparatory work, this article argues that the article 1.1 should be read as applying to non-modespecified contracts, subject to the condition that the contract provides for sea carriage either explicitly or implicitly. It is submitted here that this is the most faithful interpretation of article 1.1 to both the text and its spirit, though it would be preferable had the Rotterdam Rules elaborated the issue with a specific provision regarding such contracts

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Rotterdam Rules, Scope of Application, Door to door transport contracts

Kaynakça

1. Asariotis, Regina, (et al.), “Intermodal Transportation and Carrier Liability” (European Commission, Luxembourg, 1999)
2. Baatz, Yvonne, (et al.) “The Rotterdam Rules: a practical annotation” (Informa, London, 2009)
3. Beare, Stuart, “The Rotterdam Rules – Some Controversies”, 2010 CMI Yearbook, 516.
4. Berlingieri, Francesco, “Revisiting the Rotterdam Rules”, [2010] LMCLQ (Lloyds’ Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly) 583
5. Berlingieri Francesco, “Multimodal aspects of the Rotterdam Rules”, (CMI Colloquium of the Rotterdam Rules, 2009), 2 found at (accessed, 30/03/16) (Berlingieri-2)
6. Bokareva, Olena, “Carriage of goods through multimodal transportation: in search of international and regional harmonisation” (2015) 21 JIML 368.
7. Chhina, Ramandeep, “Uniform International Legal Regime for Multimodal Transport: Unarguable Need but No General Acceptance”, (2013) 19 JIML (Journal of International Maritime Law), 516
8. Clarke, Malcolm A, “Multimodal transport in the new millennium” (2002) 1.1 WMUJMA (World Maritime University Journal of Maritime Affairs) 71.

9. Clarke, Malcolm A, “The Transport of Goods in Europe: Patterns and Problems of Uniform Law” [1999] LMCLQ (Lloyds’ Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly) 36
10. Collins English Dictionary, (HarperCollins Publishers, London, 2009)
11. Collins English Thesaurus Home Edition, (HarperCollins Publishers, London, 2009).
12. de Wit, Ralph, “Multimodal Transport”, (LLP, London 1995)
13. de Wit, Ralph, “Minimal music: multimodal transport including a maritime leg under the Rotterdam Rules”, Ch. 5 in Thomas, Rhidian D (ed), “The Carriage of Goods by Sea under the Rotterdam Rules”, (Lloyd’s List, London, 2010) (de Wit-2)
14. Diamond A, “The Rotterdam Rules” [2009] LMCLQ (Lloyds’ Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly) 445
15. Erling, Selvig, “The Influence of Hamburg Rules on the Work for a Convention on International Multimodal Transport”, in “Bill of Lading Conventions Conference” (LLP, 1978)
16. Faghfouri, Mahin, “International regulation of liability for multimodal transport” (2006) 5.1 WMUJMA (World Maritime University Journal of Maritime Affairs) 95.
17. Franco, Manuel, “Multimodal transport after the Rotterdam Rules; will it work this time?”, (2012) 18 JIML (Journal of International Maritime Law) 208.
18. Glass, David, “Meddling in the multimodal muddle? A network of conflict in the UNCITRAL Draft Convention on the Carriage of Goods [wholly or partly][by sea]” [2006] LMCLQ (Lloyds’ Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly) 307
19. Haak, Krijn, “Carriage Preceding or Subsequent to Sea Carriage under the Rotterdam Rules” (2010) 2 EJCLL (European Journal of Commercial Contract Law) 65
20. Hoeks, Marian,“Multimodal Transport Law: The Law Applicable to the Multimodal Contract for the Carriage of Goods” (Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, 2009), non-commercial edition found at (accessed, 30/03/16)
21. Kindred, Hugh M., and Brooks, Mary R. “Multimodal transport rules” (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1997)
22. Marten, Bevan, “Multimodal Transport Reform and the European Union: A Treaty Change Approach”, (2012) 36 TMLJ (Tulane Maritime Law Journal) 741
23. Nikaki, Theodora and Soyer, Baris “New International Regime for Carriage of Goods by Sea: Contemporary, Certain, Inclusive and Efficient, or Just Another One for the Shelves.” (2012) 30 BJIL (Berkeley Journal of International Law) 303
24. Nikaki, Theodora, “The UNCITRAL draft instrument on the carriage of goods [wholly or partly] [by sea]: multimodal at last or still all at sea?” [2005] JBL (Journal of Business Law) 647 Oxford Compact Thesaurus, (2nd Edition, OUP, Oxford, 2001)
25. Ozdel, Melis, “Multimodal Transport Documents in International Sale of Goods”, (2012) 23 ICCLR (International Company and Commercial Law Review) 238.
26. Pontoppidan, Knud, “Shipowners’ View on UNCITRAL Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea”, 2009 CMI Yearbook, 282
27. Shorter Oxford English dictionary, (5th Edition, OUP, Oxford, 2002)
28. Sturley, Michael F, “Uniformity in the law governing the carriage of goods by sea” (1995) 26 JMLC (Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce) 553
29. Sturley, Michael F, Tomotaka, Fujita, and van der Ziel, Gertjan J., The Rotterdam Rules: the UN convention on contracts for the international carriage of goods wholly or partly by sea, (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 2010)
30. Thomas, Rhidian D, “A comparative analysis of the transfer of contractual rights under the English Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 and the Rotterdam Rules”, (2011) 17 JIML (Journal of International Maritime Law) 437
31. Thomas, Rhidian D, “The Emergence and application of the Rotterdam Rules”, in Thomas, Rhidian D (ed), “The Carriage of Goods by Sea under the Rotterdam Rules”, (Lloyd’s List, London, 2010)
32. Trappe, Johannes, “The Reform of German Transport Law”, [2001] LMCLQ, (Lloyds’ Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly) 392
33. Treitel, Guenter H QC, Sir and Reynolds, Francis MB, QC, Carver on bills of lading, (3rd Ed., Sweet & Maxwell, London, 2011), 778, (Carver)
34. van der Ziel, Gertjan, “Multimodal Aspects of Rotterdam Rules”, 2009 CMI Yearbook 301
35. Verheyen, Wouter, “Fleximodal Contracts and CMR: the Belgian Approach”, (2012) 18 JIML (Journal of International Maritime Law) 364
36. Verheyen, Wouter “Forum clauses in carriage contracts after the Brussels 1 (bis) Regulations: procedural (un)certainty”, (2015) 21 JIML (Journal of International Maritime Law) 23. (Verheyen-2) “UNCTAD/ICC Rules for Multimodal Transport Documents”, ICC publication No. 481
37. EC, “The economic impact of carrier liability on intermodal freight transport”, (European Commission, 2001), 39-40, found at: , (accessed, 30/03/16).
38. IMO, “International Shipping Facts and Figures – Information Resources on Trade, Safety, Security, Environment”, (2012), found at (accessed, 30/03/16)
39. Rail freight corridors under The Regulation concerning a European Rail Network for Competitive Freight (Rail Freight Regulation 913/2010) (accessed, 30/03/16)
40. The ICC Uniform Rules for a Combined Transport Document”, ICC Publication No. 298
41. UN GA “UNCITRAL Compilation of comments by Governments and intergovernmental organizations” (A/CN.9/658/Add.13), para 10, found at (accessed 30/03/16)
42. UN GA, “Report of UNCITRAL 41st Session”, (A/63/17), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
43. UN GA, “UNCITRAL Compilation of comments by Governments and intergovernmental organizations” (A/CN.9/658), found at (accessed 30/03/15)
44. UN GA, “UNCITRAL Compilation of comments by Governments and intergovernmental organizations” (A/CN.9/658/Add.11), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
45. UN GA, “UNCITRAL Summary record of the 865th meeting” (A/CN.9/SR.865), para 36 et seq, found at (accessed 30/03/16).
46. UN GA, “UNCITRAL Summary record of the 877th meeting” (A/CN.9/SR.877), pages 3-8, found at (accessed 30/03/16).
47. UNCITRAL, “Report of the Working Group on Transport Law on the work of its ninth session” (A/CN.9/510), found at
48. UNCITRAL, “Report of Working Group III (Transport Law) on the work of its eleventh session” (A/CN.9/526), found at (accessed 21/07/15).
49. UNCITRAL, “Report of Working Group III (Transport Law) on the work of its fourteenth session” (A/CN.9/572), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
50. UNCITRAL, “Report of Working Group III (Transport Law) on the work of its twelfth session” (A/CN.9/544), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
51. UNCITRAL, “Report of Working Group III (Transport Law) on the work of its fifteenth session”, (A/CN.9/576), found at (accessed 30/03/16).
52. UNCITRAL, “Transport Law: Preparation of a draft instrument on the carriage of goods [by sea] - General remarks on the sphere of application of the draft instrument”, (A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.29), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
53. UNCITRAL, “Transport Law: Preparation of a draft instrument on the carriage of goods [by sea] - Proposal by the Netherlands on the application door-to-door of the instrument” A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.33, found at (accessed 30/03/16)
54. UNCITRAL, “Transport Law: Preparation of a draft instrument on the carriage of goods [by sea] - Proposal by Italy” (A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.25), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
55. UNCITRAL, “Transport Law: Preparation of a draft instrument on the carriage of goods [wholly or partly] [by sea] Provisional redraft of the articles of the draft instrument considered in the Report of Working Group III on the work of its twelfth session (A/CN.9/544)” (A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.36), found at (accessed 30/03/16)
56. UNCITRAL, “Transport Law: Preparation of a draft instrument on the carriage of goods [wholly or partly] [by sea] - Scope of Application Provisions”, (A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.44), found at (accessed 30/03/16).
57. UNCTAD, “Report on Multimodal Transport: The Feasibility of an International Legal Transport” (2003), UNCTAD/SDTE/TLB/2003/1, para 6, found at (accessed, 30/03/16)
58. UNCTAD, “Report on Review of Maritime Transport” (2013), UNCTAD/RMT/2013, 7, (accessed, 21/07/15).
59. UNECE report on “Possibilities for reconciliation and harmonization of civil liability regimes governing combined transport” TRANS/WP.24/1999/2, para 16, found at (accessed 30/03/16)