In eight pages F.O.B. and C.I.F. contracts for goods shipment are examined in terms of similarities, differences, risks, responsibilities, and goods passing of title. Ten sources are listed in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: TS14_TEciffob.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
most commonly known and used of F.O.B and C.I.F contracts (Anonymous, 2002). These are short for free on board (fob) or cast, insurance and freight (cif) (White and Bradgate, 1993).
These are seen as the basis on which many contracts are written, and in terms of their meaning there are some very diverse variation as well as some close similarities.
If we consider C.I.F contract we can then compare F.O.B . It is interesting to note that 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). Moreover, where the contract specifies
that there are C.I.F terms, or F.O.B terms it would be wrong of the law to disregard that statement (Anonymous, 2002). When we consider international trade and the role of
shipping goods this can be seen as a vital area of commerce, and therefore needs to be regulated by law in order to ensure its smooth operation. However, it was
apparent form the nineteenth century that there were some gaps in the law and deficiencies provided by common law as well as statute law in the form of the Bills
of Lading Act 1855 (White and Bradgate, 1993). This act was repealed by The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 and was seen to bring English law onto the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 these 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