운송인의 인도지연 책임에 관한 법적 쟁점 -로테르담 규칙을 바탕으로-

Delay was on the agenda from the beginning of the UNCITRAL process. ‘Delay in delivery’ is limited to the carrier's failure to deliver ‘within the time agreed’ in the contract of carriage. Thus the carrier is not liable for failing to deliver the goods ‘within the time it would be reasonable to expect of a diligent carrier,’ as UNCITRAL had initially agreed. The Rotterdam Rules' delay provisions instead focus on economic loss (consequential damages), which can arise in a number of different forms. It is restricted to loss (economic loss) as a result of not delivering the cargo at the agreed place of destination at the agreed time. The most common form of is a simple loss of market. The agreement need not be explicit. The difference is quite important because the rules on the calculation of the compensation and limitations of liability are quite different: first, whereas compensation for loss and damage are dealt with by using the formula of the sound market value, no such formula exists in case of delay. What is the extent of the compensation for delay? Although it is clear that the loss would most probably be of a financial nature, it is not clarified in the text how far in terms of proximity and predictability it is possible to go in calculating compensation for delay. Such economic loss can easily be many times the value of the goods delayed. That is why article 60 provides that the amounts established for physical loss and damage pursuant article 22 shall also function as a limit for economic and financial loss caused by delay. In contrast to physical damage, however, this loss of limitation does not apply to the limitation amount of two and one-half the freight only, but due to the reference to article 22 is in article 60, also to the sound market value limitation.