论THC概念之界定及其合理支付主体

Concept and reasonable payment party of THC

针对我国货主是否应支付装卸港THC的问题,结合我国现行法律法规以及相关国际贸易惯例和国际公约的规定,阐述THC的概念及其争议的产生、THC的合理支付主体等问题,指出THC与承运人向码头营运人支付的集装箱码头装卸包干费相对应,是为弥补承运人因运输集装箱货物而垫付的集装箱码头装卸包干费而向货方收取的费用;在我国现行法律未作明确规定的情况下,班轮公司应暂时向合同托运人收取装卸港THC,其向我国货主收取装卸港THC的行为不符合合同相对性原理.建议我国现行对外贸易立法或航运立法应予修订,但目前班轮公司欲向发货人或收货人收取THC,应在运输合同或运输单证中对此作明确约定.

In view of the problem whether the Chinese cargo owners should pay the loading and unloading THC, based on the provisions of the corresponding laws or rules of China, international conventions and international practices, the concept and the reasonable payment party of THC are expounded. It points out that the THC, which the liners charged Chinese consignors or consignees, is to compensate the liners for stevedoring Lump Sum Charge of containers paid to port operators. Moreover, if the laws of China do not provide or the contract of carriage does not stipulate, it is not in accordance with the principle of the probity of contract to charge Chinese consignors or consignees for the THC, and the liners shall charge the THC from contract shippers temporarily. Therefore, the foreign trade laws or the ocean shipping acts of China shall be amended in order to make the collection of the THC legalization. However, the liners shall definitely stipulate in transport contract or transport documents if the liners want to charge the THC from Chinese consignors or consignees.