On the release of goods without Presentation of B/L in carriage of goods by sea
——Taking into consideration the introspection and query to the focus of issue of releasing of goods without B/L


Summary Introduction

Bills of lading, the document invented by European merchant, has become the basis of international trade and shipping by hundreds of years’ practice, customs and improvements.[1] These years, the case of taking delivery without B/L has been a large proportion in maritime trials, becoming the focus of the issue of B/L. It has been a long time people argued its nature, legal responsibility and the legal validity of the letter of guarantee. Some people even say “taking delivery without B/L nearly is one of the ‘aberrant’ ocean carriage acts relating to the most problems in theory and practice.”[2] It will be necessary to thrash over the problem for carrier, the owner of goods, agent of shipping and goods and the parties of trade, and it will be beneficial to improve our credit of foreign trade. This article will regulate these issues systematically and try to interpellate the viewpoint about the character of this act and the validity of the letter of guarantee. Meanwhile it will recognize the legal responsibility of the issue logically from a new angular .At last it will give some resolutions to solve the problem of taking delivery without original B/L.
















List of content


1. Legal basis of taking delivery with original B/L:
(a). The legal character of B/L demands of taking delivery with original B/L
(b). Taking delivery with original B/L is an international usage
2. The judgment, causality, typical model and demur of the act of releasing of goods without B/L:
(a). The criterion for judgment of the act of releasing of goods without B/L
(b). The causality and typical model of releasing of goods without B/L
(c). The demur of releasing of goods without B/L
3. The responsibility attribution and exertion of legal capacity to sue of releasing of goods without B/L—— the criticism to the “doctrine of breach of contract ”, “doctrine of tort ”, “doctrine of concurrent”
(a). The doctrines of the responsibility attribution of releasing of goods without B/L and the evaluation of them
(b). The posteriori from the logically subsequent of the responsibility attribution of releasing of goods without B/L
4. Letter of guarantee of releasing of goods without B/L—— the interpellation to recent theory and practice
(a). The nature of letter of guarantee
(b). The validity of letter of guarantee —— the interpellation to the criterion of “good faith and malice”.
(c). The extending tendency of the independence of letter of guarantee ——Demand Guarantees.
5. The resolution to the issue of releasing of goods without B/L.
(a). The advice given to solve the issue
(b). The evaluation to the advice mentioned above and the viewpoint about it




上海市人大


上海市第八届人民代表大会关于质询的暂行办法
上海市人大



（1983年4月18日上海市第八届人民代表大会第一次会议主席团第一次会议通过）


根据《中华人民共和国宪法》和有关法律的规定，结合本市实际情况，特制订市人民代表大会关于质询的暂行办法。
一、市人民代表大会代表，可以依照本暂行办法规定的程序提出质询案。
二、在市人民代表大会会议期间，一个代表团或者十名以上的代表，可以书面提出对市人民政府及其所属工作部门、市人民法院、市人民检察院的质询案。质询案须经代表团团长签署意见后，由主席团决定交受质询机关书面答复，或者由受质询机关的负责人在主席团会议上或者有关代
表团会议上口头答复。
三、受质询机关在口头答复时，提质询案的代表可以参加会议，发表意见。
四、受质询机关一般应在市人民代表大会会议期间作出答复。如果涉及的问题比较复杂，需要一定时间研究后才能答复的，受质询机关可以提出要求，经大会主席团批准，在会后到常务委员会召开的会议上答复。
五、受质询机关要认真负责地把质询案的最后处理结果，报告市人民代表大会常务委员会，由市人大常务委员会办公厅转告有关代表。
六、在市人民代表大会审议议案的时候，代表对所涉及的一些问题不了解，可以向本市有关国家机关提出询问，经代表团团长签署意见后，由大会秘书处通知有关机关派人在代表小组或者代表团会议上作解释说明。



1983年4月18日