Bibliographie sélective OHADA

La situation de l’expertise maritime amiable facultés peut être résumée par le constat suivant : bien qu’elle ne soit pas réglementée, elle est, dans le cadre des contrats d’assurances facultés, quasi-systématiquement prévue. La résolution de ce paradoxe réside dans l’efficacité de cette institution, forgée par sa pratique historique. Cette efficacité est fondée sur des caractéristiques, tenant d’abord à l’expert mais impactant également la réalisation de l’expertise. Sur la base des critères que doit présenter l’expert, à savoir la compétence et l’indépendance, les parties impliquées dans la négociation du contrat d’assurance facultés élaborent une liste d’experts agréés pour intervenir, en particulier, en cas de dommage. Néanmoins, ce choix ne lie pas les parties, les modalités devant présenter une certaine flexibilité afin de correspondre aux exigences du commerce international, dont le transport maritime est le vecteur principal. Par ailleurs, l’expertise doit être réalisée de manière méthodique et contradictoire afin de faire émerger la vérité factuelle du dommage et du sinistre et donc de pouvoir utilement remplir sa fonction principale, qui est probatoire. En tout état de cause, l’efficacité de l’expertise reste limitée, notamment au regard de la valeur probatoire que certaines juridictions françaises accordent au rapport d’expertise amiable, appelant des évolutions de l’expertise maritime ainsi qu’une amélioration des fondements de son efficience

Dans la mesure où le transport maritime de marchandises implique divers types d’opérateurs commerciaux internationaux, l’uniformité de la règlementation applicable semble être le meilleur moyen de satisfaire aux exigences de sécurité de ces différents acteurs. Il est donc nécessaire de se demander si cet idéal d’uniformisation du droit du transport maritime de marchandises tenté par les États est atteignable voire même souhaitable ou s’il ne faut pas constater en la matière que les opérateurs du transport international maritime de marchandises, loin d’être pénalisés par le conflit de normes applicables, n’y trouvent pas la souplesse nécessaire pour adapter le cadre juridique à leur propre contrat de transport. As the international transport of goods by sea involves various kinds of international trade operators, uniformity of the law appears to be the best way to satisfy the security requirements of these various operators. Nevertheless, States cannot create new rules for this activity, by simply unifying regulations in a conventional manner. There is a conflict between the desire for uniformity and the realities of implementing rules, as a consequence of divergences within the convention. This is the reason for which maritime actors have tried to standardize contracts, and support ruling jurisdictions. How can such practices contribute to the uniformity of soft law?

This thesis examines how multimodal transport can play a role in achieving the objectives of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The thesis argues that multimodal transport is cheaper compared with unimodal transportation. While there are a number of issues affecting the operationalisation of multimodal transport in Africa, this study considers, at its core, the legal regimes and other fragmented institutional and governance frameworks of multimodal transport in West Africa. The fragmentation of the legal framework governing multimodal transport leads to uncertainty and unforeseeability of the liability of parties involved in multimodal transport, consequently leading to increased legal costs. There is an undisputed view that for effective regional integration, which Africa is seeking to achieve through the establishment of the African Continental Free Trade Area, there is a need to eliminate all trade barriers. Trade barriers (tariff or non-tariff barriers) should be removed to improve competitiveness and reduce trade friction costs. In other words, to achieve the objectives of the African Continental Free Trade Area, it is essential that all unnecessary costs associated with trade are eliminated or reduced to the barest minimum. The process of doing this is called trade facilitation. This thesis looks at the impact of trade facilitation on regional integration and trade. This thesis’ original contribution to knowledge is that Africa’s regional integration process needs cost-effective transportation in order to achieve smooth market access, and multimodal transportation can provide the most cost-effective solution. However, the legal uncertainty and complexities that could potentially ensue from the use of multimodal transport make it unattractive to prospective users. Accordingly, actions must be taken to reduce legal ambiguity and create a system in which liability is foreseeable and predictable. This study reveals that the current legal framework is incomplete, unsatisfactory and, ultimately, leads to uncertainty. The thesis further contends that neither the option of freedom of contract nor improving the current system of various Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS )member-states’ view of multimodal transport, can significantly improve the current fragmented system or deliver the needed certainty. Accordingly, the thesis proposes that a modified uniform system would help achieve the legal certainty needed for multimodal transport. The thesis finally submits that the ECOWAS should establish a legally binding, regional governance regime on multimodal transport and a majority of its member-states should ratify the instrument.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the trends of legal regulation in the business activity under the conditions of new coronavirus infection. The dialectical method of research in conjunction with a retrospective and comparative analysis made it possible to identify three main trends in the legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity in the framework of new socio-economic realities. The increasing role of state regulation of entrepreneurial activity, based on the use of public and legal means, due to the need to increase state intervention in the activities of entrepreneurs is shown. The state support of business for the subsequent development of the economy and compliance with the social balance is also increasing. Accordingly, the social importance of entrepreneurial activity is growing. The pandemic has also intensified the digitalization of entrepreneurial activity, of transport companies, since many traditional forms of doing business are limited by the forced isolation of society. Individual means of digitalization, including the industrial Internet of Things, e-commerce, and smart contracts, have become most prevalent. Consequently, the pandemic cannot be viewed only as a negative factor, its impact on entrepreneurial activity also has a positive effect.

Multimodal taşıma; multimodal taşıma sözleşmesine binaen multimodal taşıma operatörünün eşyaların bir yerden farklı yerdeki teslimat için belirlenmiş bir noktaya taşınmasını en az iki farklı taşıma türü ile gerçekleştirmeyi taahhüt ettiği bir taşımadır. Konteyner kullanımının yaygınlaşması, günümüzde uluslararası eşya taşımalarının birden fazla taşıma türü kullanılarak kapıdan kapıya şeklinde yapılmasına olanak sağlamıştır. Bu sayede multimodal taşıma tüm dünyada yaygın hale gelmiştir. Taşıma sektöründe sıklıkla kullanılan bu taşıma türünün hukuki açıdan izahı önem arz etmektedir. Bu sebeple, multimodal taşımanın tanımı ve unsurları ele alınmıştır. Bu taşımanın diğer taşıma türleri ile benzerlik ve farklıkları değerlendirilmiştir. Her bir taşıma türüne ilişkin konvansiyonlar, ülkelerin ulusal hukuk düzenlemeleri ve multimodal taşımaya ilişkin yeknesak kurallar oluşturma amacıyla getirilen düzenleme çalışmaları ve düzenlemeler göz önüne alındığında multimodal taşımaya hangi hukuk düzenlemelerinin uygulanacağını öngörmek zordur. Multimodal taşımalarda sorumluluğu yeknesaklaştırmak adına en önemli düzenlemeler 1975 ve 1992 tarihli Milletlerarası Ticaret Odası (ICC) Kuralları ve halen yürürlüğe girmemiş olan 1980 Tarihli Multimodal Taşıma Konvansiyonu (MTC), 2009 tarihinde imzaya açılan Eşyaların Tamamen veya Kısmen Deniz Yoluyla Uluslararası Taşınmasına İlişkin Konvansiyondur (Rotterdam Kuralları-RK). Bu düzenlemelerden esinlenilerek ortaya çıkmış çeşitli bölgesel düzenlemeler söz konusudur. Bunun yanı sıra multimodal taşımanın ülke sınırları içerisinde gerçekleşebilmesi sebebiyle bazı ülkeler bu konuyu düzenleyen kanunlar yapmışlardır. Türk Hukunda ise multimodal taşımaya ilk kez 6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nda (TTK), 'Değişik Tür Araçlar İle Taşıma' başlığı altında yer verilmiştir. MTO'nun zıya, hasar ve geç teslime dayalı sözleşme kaynaklı sorumluluğu zarar yerinin belirlenebilir olup olmamasına göre farklı kurallara tabidir. Zarar yerinin belirlenmesi ve multimodal taşıma sözleşmesinin taraflarından birinin zararın hangi taşıma türünde oluştuğunu ispatlaması durumunda, multimodal taşıma birden fazla taşıma türünü içerdiğinden denizyolu, havayolu, karayolu, demiryolu ve ülke iç suyolu gibi her bir taşıma türünü ayrı ayrı düzenleyen ve her biri kendi sorumluluk rejimini içeren uluslararası unimodal (tekil) taşıma konvansiyonlarından usulüne göre yürürlüğe girmiş olanları öncelikli olmak üzere, ilgili taşıma türünü özel olarak düzenleyen kurallar uygulanacaktır. Zararın gerçekleştiği taşıma türünün tespit edilememesi durumunda genel hüküm olarak adlandırabileceğimiz TTK hükümleri uygulama alanı bulacaktır. Çalışmada, Türk Hukukunda MTO'nun sorumluluğu ilgili konvansiyonlar ve TTK ışığında ele alınmış, uygulanacak hükümler ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Multimodal Taşıma, Multimodal Taşıma Sözleşmesi, Multimodal Taşıma Operatörü, Multimodal Taşıma Operatörünün Sorumluluğu. Multimodal transport is a carriage in which multimodal transport operator, who assumes the responsibility of performing the carriage under the multimodal transport contract, undertakes to perform the carriage of goods by at least two modes of transport from one place to another place designated for delivery. Widespread use of containers today allows international transport of goods to be in the form of door-to-door transport using more than one mode of transport. Thus, multimodal transport becomes more widespread all over the world. Explaining this mode of transport, which is frequently used in the transport industry, from the legal perspective is of high importance. Hence, in this study, the definition and elements of multimodal transport are studied. The similarities and differences of this mode of transport with other modes of transport are evaluated. Considering different conventions regulating each mode of transport, national transport legislations and regulations aimed at setting forth uniform provisions, it is clearly difficult to determine rules that are applicable for the multimodal transport contract. Major regulations to uniform the liability in multimodal carriages are the 1975 and 1992 International Chamber of Commerce Rules, the 1980 Multimodal Transport Convention (MTC) and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea (Rotterdam Rules-RT), which was open for signature in 2009. There are also regional regulations inspired by these instruments. In addition, a number of countries enact laws regulating multimodal transport, as multimodal transport may be performed within national boundaries, and there are no uniform rules regulating it. In Turkish law, certain rules on multimodal transport in the Turkish Commercial Law (TTK) No.6102 under the heading of 'Carriage by Various Modes of Transport (Multimodal Transport)' were introduced. The MTO's contractual liability for loss of or damage to goods or delay in delivery is subject to different rules depending on whether the place of loss can be located. If the place of loss is located, and the leg of transport in which the loss occurs is proved by any party of the multimodal transport contract, as the transport involves more than one mode of transport, rules specifically regulating that mode of transport, in particular unimodal conventions, which duly entered into effect, individually governing each mode of transport such as sea, air, road, rail and inland waterway transports and having its own liability regime, will be applicable. If the mode of transport in which the loss occurs cannot be ascertained, TTK provisions, which we may call general rules, will be applicable. In the present study, we analyse the liability of MTO within the framework of relevant conventions and TTK and seek to reveal applicable provisions. Keywords: Multimodal Transport, Multimodal Transport Contract Multimodal Transport Operator, Liability of Multimodal Transport Operator

Deniz ticaret hukukunda, varma limanında yükün teslimini talep eden kişi, gönderilen olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Gönderilen, navlun sözleşmesinin tarafı olan taşıtan olabileceği gibi sözleşme ilişkisi dışında üçüncü bir kişi de olabilir. Gönderilenin üçüncü kişi olması hâlinde navlun sözleşmesi üçüncü kişi yararına sözleşme olarak nitelendirilmektedir. Kanun koyucu, sözleşme ilişkisine taraf olmayan bu üçüncü kişi için de bir takım hak ve sorumluluklar getirmiştir. İşte bu çalışmanın konusunu üçüncü kişi sıfatını haiz gönderilenin navlun sözleşmesinden kaynaklanan sorumluluğu oluşturmaktadır. Sözleşmelerin nispiliği prensibi gereği kural olarak tarafların anlaşarak üçüncü kişiyi borç altına sokmaları mümkün değildir. Bununla birlikte üçüncü kişi gönderilenin hangi hallerde sorumlu olacağı TTK m. 1203'te düzenlenmiştir. Buna göre gönderilenin navlun sözleşmesi kapsamında sorumlu olması için ilk olarak eşyanın teslimini talep etmesi gerekmektedir. Eşyanın teslimini talep, üçüncü kişi lehine sözleşme teorisi açısından edimin kabulü olarak değerlendirilmekte ve haliyle gönderilenin borç altına girmesi tarafların kararlaştırması ile değil öncelikle kendi iradesi ile olmaktadır. Gönderilenin sorumlu tutulmasının diğer şartını, teslim talebinin dayandığı taşıma sözleşmesinde ya da deniz taşıma senetlerinde bu borçların gönderilen üzerine bırakılması oluşturmaktadır. Dolayısıyla gönderilenin yükün teslimi sözleşmeden ya da deniz taşıma senetlerinden kaynaklanan bu alacakların ödenmesi şartına bağlanmaktadır. Gönderilenin hangi alacaklardan sorumlu olduğu sözleşme şartlarına göre tespit edilmektedir. Bu kapsamda sözleşme kayıtlarının incelenmesi gerekir. Navlun sözleşmesinde gönderilen uygulamada genellikle denizaşırı alıcı olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Dolayısıyla Incoterms uyarınca tarafların kararlaştırdığı teslim şekillerinin ve FIO/FIOST/FILO/LIFO gibi gönderilenin sorumluluğunu genişleten kayıtların incelenmesi önemlidir. Bu kapsamda gönderilenin navlun sözleşmesinden kaynaklanan hangi borç kalemlerinden sorumlu olduğu sözleşme hükümleri ve mevzuat ile ayrıntılı bir şekilde açıklanmıştır. [...] The consignee is defined as a person who requesting the delivery of the cargo at the discharge port by the maritime commercial law. The consignee might be the shipper, as a party of contract of affreightment, or might be a third party of the contract. In the case of the consignee is a third party, the contract of affreightment is characterized as a third-party beneficiary contract in which determined rights and responsibilities are given to this third party by the law makers. This thesis aims to determine the responsibilities of the third-party consignee that arising from the contract of affreightment. With regard to privity of the contract principle, as a rule, parties of a contract do not have right to bind a third party with obligations. On the other hand, the conditions of responsibilities of the third party consignee is regulated in the article 1203 of TCC. With regard to the article, in order for the consignee to be liable under the freight contract, the consignee must first request the delivery of the goods. The demand for the delivery of the goods is considered as the acceptance of the performance in terms of the theory of third party beneficiary contract and as a matter of fact, the consignee do not incur a debt with the parties' decision, but primarily with his own will. The other condition of holding the consignee responsible is the transfer of these debts to the consignee in the contract of affreightment or other transport documents on which the delivery request is based. Therefore, the delivery of the cargo is subject to the payment of these debts arising from the contract or transport documents. The debts of the consignee are determined according to the terms of the contract. In this context, it is necessary to review of the terms of the contract. In practice, the consignee in the contract of affreightment usually appears as a overseas receiver of the sale contract. Therefore, it is important to examine both the delivery methods agreed by the parties with regard to INCOTERMS and clauses that expand the responsibility of the sender, such as FIO/FIOST/FILO/LIFO. In this framework, this study explains in detail the responsibilities of consignee with regard to freight contract provisions and legislations.

This thesis explores the regulation of airport charges, which is an important but marginalised topic. It particularly examines how private law instruments can play a role in the regulatory process. Airports used to be subject to traditional regulation, which operates in a command-and-control mode. As the airport industry becomes increasingly complicated, traditional regulation seems problematic. First, the method that is associated with traditional regulation to draw a line between regulated and unregulated airports has downsides. Second, the international regulatory framework on airport charges lacks binding rules. This suggests that traditional regulation is not the best niche for airport charges regulation. Third, good regulation needs independent regulatory bodies, which are hard to achieve in practice.In this context, this thesis argues that a private law approach can serve as a more flexible and effective way to regulate airport charges. There are two instruments under this overarching approach. First, contracts can be adopted to incorporate airport charges regulations. Second, robust corporate governance generates the effect of good regulation. This is an interdisciplinary work that has engaged air law, contract law, corporate law, competition law, and aviation business and management. It also employs the method of case studies. Chapter 4 examines the regulation of airport charges in the UK, Canada, and India. The three case studies demonstrate that private law instruments have been implicitly implemented to different degrees in these countries. These demonstrate the feasibility of applying private ordering in the regulatory process. I also look into the regulation of countries and regions including Australia, Ireland, the EU, and Germany throughout this thesis. This study also examines a specific sector of airport charges, namely, charges for ground-handling services. This sector possesses a unique feature in that it is between aeronautical and non-aeronautical services. A private law approach can also be adopted in the regulation of charges relating to ground-handling services. Additionally, ICAO as an important international organisation governing international air transport can also contribute to a private law approach of airport charges through its soft-law making function. This thesis aims to shed light on a private law approach, as an innovative regulatory mechanism, to airport charges. That said, regulation by this approach and traditional regulation are not contradictory but can cooperate to an extent, depending on how much power one wants to give to private ordering