Research Paper on:
CIF; A Case Study

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
CIF contract has been used. Carrysure plc carry the fertiliser to the UK form Singapore, but during the sea voyage there is a fire and the goods are destroyed. The  fire was due to a lack of fire fighting equipment. The issues in question are the obligations of the parties when it comes to the contract, the carriage and the  insurance. To answer this question we need to look at the use and obligations that are in place under CIF contracts. Here we will need to make some assumptions,  as it was shown in the case of The Albazero [1977] A.C. 774 Roskill LJ noted that in reality there are very few contracts which will be purely C.I.F, or  F.O.B, as there are usually some form of variation (Anonymous, 2002). However, where the contract specifies that there are C.I.F terms, as is the case with Traders PLC, or F.O.B  terms it would be wrong of the law to disregard that statement (Anonymous, 2002). The relevant current act is The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992, this repealed the  former Bills of Lading Act 1855 and was seen to bring English law onto the same level as international law and international jurisdictions (White and Bradgate, 1993). In  general terms there are two main contract, fob and cif. In both of these types of contract the risk is bourn by the buyer, this is true even if the  contract is made after the shipment is sent and on board the freighter (White and Bradgate, 1993). Under both of these types of contract the buyer is not a party  to the carriage contract, and as such has not had an entitlement to take action against the carriage company where there is damage caused to the cargo, or the cargo