Carrier

Background: Ethics are closely tied to people’s beliefs, values, ​​and ideals, and custom assumes a special sacredness for morality. The present study attempts to investigate the role of ethics in civil liability law and the ethical aspects of fault and compensation of damages arising from faults. Through analyzing ethics and its philosophy as well as investigating the ethical theories, the present study also aims to investigate the effects of ethics on civil liability theories. Moreover, by examining the contents of the first part, this study examines the principles of civil liability of the transport operator. Conclusion: Regarding human’s ethical liability, there are two main views in ethical philosophy. First, there is a retrospective view stating that human is responsible for his decision-making power and voluntary actions. Second view is a prospective one holding human responsible for the consequences of his/her actions. Much of the theory of civil liability is inspired by these two views. In the field of transportation, the legal relationship between the sender and the operator of the multimodal transport, under a single contract, is called the multimodal transport contract. The basis of transport operator liability in single-mode conventions is diverse. The basis of liability in The Hague and Warsaw Conventions is based on fault. As for the liability of operators of shipping terminals in international trade (1994), the Hamburg, CMR, CIM, Montreal and the United Nations Conventions are based on presumed liability.

Although liability under general tort and contract law principles is not limited to a certain amount, liability arising under a carriage contract is limited by the majority of international transport conventions and national legislatures and, there are certain reasons given to justify the “essential departure from the current rules of civil law” and it is common for the liability of the carrier to be limited under the international regimes regarding transportation. The limitation of liability, which is nowadays considered to be a basic right rather than a privilege, is not a matter of justice, but merely a matter of public policy. Naturally, under modern transport law regimes, willful misconduct is not the only situation whereby the carrier or ship-owner loses his right to limit. Conventions regarding means of transportation, particularly road carriage, also employ provisions for breaking the limits. The aim of this paper is to investigate the effects of willful misconduct and gross negligence of road carrier in CMR, CVR, and COTIF 1999 (CIM and CIV) conventions and for this purpose admitted solutions in said convention is discussed.