Penalty for late delivery of goods. For late delivery of cargo, the carrier pays a fine to the consignee, not the consignor. Name of the organization to which the claim is sent Your organization is obliged to pay a fine for disrupting loading in the amount of

18.05.2020

One of the terms of the contract for the carriage of goods may be the delivery time. At the same time, the delivery time does not apply to the essential terms of the contract of carriage, because if it is not specified, it is determined at the rate of 300 kilometers per day for long-distance transportation (clause 63 “b” of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated April 15, 2011 No. 272 "On approval of the Rules cargo transportation by car"). If the carrier violates the delivery time of the goods, then he has the right to demand a fine.

Being late for unloading is a violation of the carrier's contractual obligations, for which civil liability arises.

According to Part 11 of Art. 34 of the Federal Law of 08.11.2007 No. 259-FZ "Charter of Road Transport and Urban Surface Electric Transport" the penalty for being late for unloading is determined by the parties in the transportation contract. If the parties have not agreed on this issue, then the penalty for late delivery of the goods is 9% of the transportation price. You should pay special attention to the fact that the amount of the fine cannot exceed the amount of the carriage charge.

The parties to the contract of carriage have the right to determine from what moment the delay in the delivery of goods begins to be calculated. If this issue is not regulated by the contract, then it is considered that the carrier violated the delivery time of the goods from twenty-four hours of the day when the goods should be delivered, that is, from the beginning calendar day following the day of delivery of the goods.

Arrangement of delay for unloading.

Do I need to draw up an act of being late for unloading? This issue has not yet been finally resolved and therefore is the subject of discussions and disputes. So, part 11 of Art. 34 UATiGNET provides that the basis for charging a penalty for late delivery of goods is a note in the consignment note about the time of arrival of the vehicle at the unloading point.

On the other hand, paragraph 79 “e” of the PPGA provides that in case of delay in the delivery of goods to the recipient, an act must be drawn up.

The rules for the carriage of goods by road were approved by the Government of the Russian Federation in accordance with Art. 3 UATiGNET. PPGAT concretize and clarify certain points related to automotive freight transport. In addition, Art. 38 of the Charter of Road Transport establishes that the circumstances that are the basis for the liability of carriers, charterers, consignors, consignees, charterers when transporting goods or providing Vehicle for the carriage of goods, are certified by acts or marks in the waybills, waybills, accompanying sheets. The procedure for drawing up acts and putting marks in documents is established by the rules for the carriage of goods.

The absence of a properly drawn up act on the delay in the delivery of cargo has repeatedly served as a reason for refusing to satisfy the requirements related to the delay of the carrier for unloading. Registration of acts is devoted to our website.

If the carrier has delayed the delivery of the goods, the following steps must be taken:

Make sure that in the 7th column of all copies of the bill of lading, the planned (agreed by the parties) date of delivery and the actual date of arrival of the vehicle for unloading are indicated.
Draw up an act of delay in delivery.
In the 17th column of all copies of the bill of lading, mark the drawn up act.

Who pays a fine for late delivery of goods.

Despite the fact that the contract of carriage is bilateral, concluded between the consignor and the carrier, Part 11 of Art. 34 UATiGNET determines that the carrier pays the penalty for delay in delivery of goods to the consignee. According to Art. 2 UATiGNET the consignee is an individual or entity authorized to receive the goods.

This position was taken by the Supreme Court. Russian Federation in ruling No. 309-ES16-3979 dated August 1, 2016 in case No. A71-4317/2015. The position is based on the current legislation and strengthens the position of lawyers who claim that the contract of carriage is a contract concluded in favor of a third party (consignee).

Delivery time vs Driver's work and rest schedule.

The delivery time of the cargo is in no way tied to and does not depend on the provisions established by the Order of the Ministry of Transport of Russia dated August 20, 2004 No. 15 "On Approval of the Regulations on the Peculiarities of the Working Hours and Rest Time of Car Drivers" provisions. Carrier, being a professional entity entrepreneurial activity, before the conclusion of the contract, is obliged to calculate and determine in what time he will be able to deliver the goods, taking into account all the factors influencing this.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 14 UATiGNET, carriers are obliged to deliver goods within the terms established by the contract for the carriage of goods, and if the specified terms are not established in the contract for the carriage of goods, within the terms established by the rules for the carriage of goods. The mode of work and rest (RTO) does not correspond with the delivery time; in this case, the carrier is obliged to comply with both. Obviously, due to the impossibility of changing the provisions on RTO, the carrier is obliged to set a reasonable time for the delivery of goods in the contract. For violation of the RTO, the driver bears administrative responsibility (part 2 of article 11.23 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation), for the delay in the delivery of goods, the carrier bears civil liability (part 11 of article 34 of the UATiGNET).

Collection of a fine for being late for unloading.

After the fact of delay in the delivery of goods by road has been properly recorded, the consignee has the right to apply to the carrier with a claim to pay a fine for the delay in delivery of the goods. Making a claim is mandatory. If the carrier refuses to satisfy the claim or ignores the claim, the consignee has the right to apply to the court to recover a penalty for late delivery of the goods.

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of April 15, 2011 N 272
"On approval of the Rules for the carriage of goods by road"

63. The carrier delivers and releases the cargo to the consignee at the address indicated by the consignor in the consignment note, the consignee accepts the cargo delivered to him. The carrier delivers the goods within the period specified in the contract for the carriage of goods. If the terms are not specified in the contract for the carriage of goods, the delivery of goods is carried out:

a) in urban, suburban traffic - within a day;

b) in intercity or international communications- at the rate of one day for every 300 km of transportation distance.

64. The carrier informs the consignor and the consignee about the delay in the delivery of cargo. Unless otherwise provided by the contract for the carriage of goods, the consignor and the consignee have the right to consider the cargo lost and demand compensation for damage for the lost cargo, if it was not issued to the consignee at his request:

a) within 10 days from the date of acceptance of the cargo for transportation - when transported in urban and suburban communications;

b) within 30 days from the day when the cargo was to be issued to the consignee - when transported in long-distance traffic.

65. The consignee has the right to refuse to accept the cargo and demand from the carrier compensation for damage in case of damage (damage) to the cargo during transportation due to the fault of the carrier, if the use of the cargo for its intended purpose is impossible.

66. If the consignee refuses to accept the cargo for reasons beyond the control of the carrier, the latter has the right to deliver the cargo to the new address specified by the consignor (cargo forwarding), and if it is impossible to deliver the cargo to the new address, return the cargo to the consignor with the appropriate prior notification. The cost of shipping the goods when it is returned or re-addressed is reimbursed by the consignor.

Federal Law of November 8, 2007 N 259-FZ
"Charter of road transport and urban ground electric transport"

11. The carrier pays the consignee a penalty for delay delivery cargo in the amount of nine percent of the carriage charge for each day of delay unless otherwise provided by the contract for the carriage of goods. total amount the penalty for late delivery of cargo cannot exceed the amount of its carriage charge. The delay in the delivery of cargo is calculated from twenty-four hours of the day, when it should be delivered cargo unless otherwise provided by the contract for the carriage of goods. The basis for charging a penalty for delay in the delivery of goods is a note in the consignment note about the time of arrival of the vehicle at the unloading point.

Losses

Geneva Convention on the Treaty international transportation of goods by road transport of 1956 (the CMR Convention), to which the Russian Federation is a party as the assignee of the USSR, regulates the liability of the carrier in case of an offense (failure of cargo and luggage, liability to the passenger, delay in delivery, etc.). Provides for a monetary limit for recoverable losses, which is currently determined in the international currency - Special Drawing Rights (SDR).

In the event of non-safety of the goods delivered by transport, a commercial act must be drawn up, fixing the nature of the non-safety, and supplementing it with an examination report, determining the amount of damage incurred and, as indicated in the form of an examination report, the cause of damage, damage to the cargo. The examination report shall be signed by the carrier's representative participating in the examination. For road transport, it is possible to make an appropriate mark on the consignment note.

The carrier's monetary limit of liability is 8.33 SDR per kg of gross weight. (in the convention indicated in gold francs - the old measure)

Can the parties to the contract of carriage by road provide for a different amount of liability in comparison with the penalties established by the UAT?

FAS ZSO (see Resolution N F04 / 1912-426 / A75-99 of 21.09.1999) answered this question in the negative. In the opinion of the cassation instance, the court correctly rejected the plaintiff's claims for the recovery of 0.5% fines and referred to Art. 126 UAT, according to which any agreements motor transport enterprises and organizations with consignors, consignees and passengers, with the aim of changing or eliminating the responsibility assigned to them by the Charter, are considered invalid.

This point of view is not entirely correct. In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 793 of the Civil Code, in case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of transportation obligations, the parties shall bear the responsibility established by the Civil Code, transport charters and codes, as well as by agreement of the parties. At the same time, paragraph 2 of the same article provides for the nullity of agreements transport organizations with passengers and cargo owners on the limitation or elimination of the statutory liability of the carrier, unless otherwise provided by transport charters and codes.

Thus, Art. 126 UAT does not contradict the Civil Code in the part that concerns the elimination or reduction of the carrier's liability. If the sanctions established by the contract, on the contrary, increase the liability of the subject, then such provision of the contract is valid and subject to application.

The waybill and waybill are the main documents in determining penalties for demurrage, delay, disruption of shipment.

The general rules for transportation, as well as the penalty for late delivery of cargo, were established by a decree of the Ministry of Transport of the RSFSR in 1971. In 2011, these standards were replaced by new, Russian rules and regulations for the transportation of goods. The full document can be found on our website PPGAT ). The second document of importance when deciding controversial situations, determining the guilty party and a fine for disrupting loading (unloading) - UAT (Charter of Motor Transport). The standard was also developed in the USSR - the current version has the status of law No. 259 F3.

Both documents normalize the procedure for transportation, operate with the same terms, but the Rules in themselves are not law. The need to follow the Rules is determined by the fact that specific articles of the civil code refer to this document, for example, article 799 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Recall that the 41st article of the Civil Code of our country is devoted to the organization of transportation. Other documents that should be determined when drawing up contracts and claims under these contracts:

International Convention (CMR) applicable to any transport agreement;
Rules for Forwarding and Transport Activities (Government Decree No. 554 of 2006);
Unified documents FIATA (Federation of Freight Carriers).

Late delivery fee

The terms of delivery of the goods are determined by paragraph 63 of the above Rules. If the period is not specifically agreed upon by the parties, then the norm is 24 hours for 300 km. As you can see, the carrier has a lot of room to maneuver, since 300 km divided by the standard 8 working hours is a speed of 40 km/h. The responsibility of the carrier in terms of meeting deadlines is considered by article 34 of the UAT (the responsibility of the sender is the 35th article of that Charter). Part 11 of this article states that the carrier is obliged to pay the recipient an amount equal to 9% of the cost of carriage multiplied by the number of days of delay (full day). This guidance determines the penalty for late payment, unless specifically agreed in a written contract between the companies. The total amount of the fine cannot exceed the amount paid for the entire carriage of the cargo.

The penalty for demurrage and non-delivery of cargo are independent of each other: payment of them can be demanded simultaneously.

The countdown of the delay starts after a 24-hour delay, i.e. a full day after the agreed date and hour of delivery. The time of arrival of the transporter to the point of shipment is calculated according to the mark in the bill of lading, the countdown of the beginning of loading operations begins at the moment the driver presents the waybill. If the recipient refuses to make a note of arrival, it is recommended to do it unilaterally with the involvement of witnesses in the operation, and also better employees recipient company. It is impossible to reduce the amount of the fine, but the carrier has the possibility of exemption from the fine for late delivery of goods under the following paragraphs of the 36th article of the UAT:

Delivery on time was prevented by force majeure circumstances (revolution, war, natural disasters);
Delivery is not possible due to reasons beyond the control of the transport company;
There is a government restriction on movement on the roads.

Separately, it is worth mentioning that the actual recipient of the goods does not always turn out to be such in a legal sense. Relations between carriers are not standardized by UAT. Moreover, the intermediary may mislead the real recipient, and deprive the carrier of the protection of the Charter. The actual carrier (and sender) needs to anticipate this moment and, in the event of litigation, draw up an exact contract with an intermediary.

Download failure penalty

The rules operate not only with the term "delay", but also "lateness" - such is the delay in the delivery of the machine to the loading area for more than two hours. Punishment for violation during loading is regulated by article 34 of the AAT, loading of containers - by article 11. The penalty for disrupting loading is decomposed into the terms “simple”, “failure to present cargo”, “non-export”, “late delivery of the vehicle” (article 10 of the AAT). The time of arrival is considered equal to the time the driver presents the waybill and documents suitable for identification. As mentioned above, in case of refusal to make a mark on arrival, it is necessary to put it with the involvement of witnesses, and upon receipt of a claim for disruption of loading, also present to the court data from the navigation system of the car (the readings of the device without a state certificate cannot serve as evidence, but they can persuade court decision in favor of the carrier).

The readiness of the cargo for shipment is determined by the carrier in accordance with the contract and annexes to the PPGA.

Failure to present the cargo entails the payment of a fine by the sender equal to 20% (unless otherwise specified in the contract) of total cost transportation (Part 1 Article 35 of the Charter). In addition, the carrier may require an additional fee for damage caused to him due to the demurrage of the vehicle. The time of loading and unloading operations is calculated according to Appendix No. 6 to the PPGAT. According to this application, the first ton is loaded into a van body in 13 minutes, all subsequent ones - in 3 minutes, i.e. 20 tons should account for no more than 70 minutes (starting from the mark in the waybill), after which the downtime countdown begins. The downtime penalty is paid for each full hour, according to the following standards:

Transportation in the city and suburbs - 5% of the amount paid for transportation;

Intercity transportation - 1% of the cost of daily transportation;

An additional 100% fine is paid for downtime of a specialized vehicle (refrigerators, forklifts).

For being late (clause 25 of the Rules), the carrier pays the same fine as the sender would pay him in the event of a downtime. However, in addition to the requirement to pay a fine for disrupting the download, the sender may refuse to work with the carrier. These violations are defined by the terms "non-provision" and "untimely provision of the vehicle". 20% are paid by the carrier for non-delivery due to his fault. Full hour lateness is also penalized as an hour of downtime (part 1 of the 34th article of the Charter).

Penalty for being late for unloading

Late delivery can cause serious harm to the recipient, especially when it comes to perishable goods. The recipient may require a separate fee for this damage. Despite the rather precise, almost European definitions prescribed in the Rules and the Charter, the process of receiving cargo and starting unloading has moments that are not fully covered. The driver may be able to achieve a mark in the TTN, but actions in case of the recipient's refusal to accept the cargo are regulated by clause 67 of the Rules, which has some nuances:

The carrier must inform the sender about the arrival of the cargo in such a way that it can be established by the court (telegram, registered letter);

Sending a notification should be sent to all addresses (actual, office address, legal) - not accepting the telegram will mean that the company's office is located elsewhere;

Upon acceptance of the cargo, the recipient may offer the carrier to pick up the cargo for further sale (the recipient has the right only when working with perishable cargo) - paragraph 6 of the 15th article of the UAT.

A mark in the waybill and TTN is made with the participation of the sender, but if there are witnesses, it can be done unilaterally

An act of refusal to accept the cargo, indicating the amount of the fine for disrupting the shipment, can be drawn up by the driver outside the territory with the involvement of witnesses. An unscrupulous recipient may deliberately deprive the driver of access to the territory, hoping to receive a fine for late delivery of the goods. To prove the guilt of the recipient (intermediary), recorded mileage data, printouts from the autonavigator will be required. The use of a tachograph could completely solve the problem, but the use of such devices also means full compliance with the working conditions of the driver.

Acts of pre-trial settlement

Penalties for failure to load the UAT and PPGAT are determined quite accurately, but the period for not presenting the cargo (Article 10, clause 4 of the UAT) is actually left to the discretion of the parties. In view of this, the term for the presentation of the goods, as well as the term for the delivery of the vehicle, which determines non-delivery (should be distinguished from the untimely submission of the vehicle), must be accurately indicated in the contract. Paragraph 79 of the PPGAT refers to the drafting of acts. According to this section of the Rules, a claim for the recovery of a fine for late delivery of goods, as well as a claim for disruption of loading, must be preceded by one of the following acts drawn up stakeholder on the same day (or the next, if it is impossible to draw it up immediately):

Failure to provide the vehicle for loading;

Delay in the supply of vehicles;

Non-delivery due to the fault of the carrier;

Delivery delay;

Simple vehicle during loading;

Failure to present cargo for transportation.

A penalty for disruption of shipment can be collected from both the sender and the carrier.

The act can be drawn up without the participation of the second party, but a note on its preparation must be made in the TTN. The other party must be notified (express mail, telegram, e-mail, if specified in the contract). The work order, TTN, accompanying sheet should contain a brief explanation of the reasons and circumstances for drawing up the act, as well as the amount of compensation required, whether it is a fine for late delivery of goods, demurrage, non-delivery or a fine for disrupting loading. The act itself is drawn up by people who have the legislative right to do so.

The carrier is responsible for the failure of cargo or baggage that occurred after accepting it for transportation and before issuing it to the consignee, a person authorized by him or a person authorized to receive baggage, unless he proves that the loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of cargo or baggage occurred due to circumstances which the carrier could not prevent and the elimination of which did not depend on him (clause 1 of article 796 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

According to Art. 95 UZhT “The carrier is responsible for the failure of the cargo, cargo luggage after accepting it for transportation and storage and before issuing it to the consignee (recipient), unless he proves that the loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of the cargo, cargo luggage occurred due to circumstances that the carrier did not could prevent or eliminate for reasons beyond his control, in particular due to:

reasons depending on the consignor (sender) or consignee (recipient);
special natural properties of the transported cargo, cargo luggage;
deficiencies in tare or packaging that could not be seen during an external inspection of the cargo, cargo luggage when receiving cargo, cargo luggage for transportation, or the use of tare, packaging that does not correspond to the properties of the cargo, cargo luggage or accepted standards, in the absence of signs of damage to the container, packaging in transit;
delivery for cargo, cargo luggage, the humidity of which exceeds the established norm.

However, in order to be released from liability, it is not enough for a railway carrier to simply refer to one of these circumstances: he must prove that it was due to one of them (or other circumstances that could not be prevented by the carrier and the elimination of which did not depend on him) that it was impossible to ensure the safety of the cargo during its transportation.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 118 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the carrier bears for the loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of the cargo after accepting it for air transportation and before issuing it to the consignee, unless he proves that he took all the necessary measures to prevent harm or such measures could not be taken.

Paragraph 1 of Art. 166 of the KTM on the issue under consideration reads as follows: “The carrier is not liable for the loss or damage of the goods accepted for transportation or for the delay in its delivery, if it proves that the loss, damage or delay occurred as a result of:

force majeure;
dangers or accidents at sea and in other navigable waters;
any measures to save people or reasonable measures to save property at sea;
fire that has arisen through no fault of the carrier;

actions or orders of the authorities (detention, arrest, quarantine, etc.);
hostilities and popular unrest;
actions or omissions of the sender or recipient;
hidden defects of the cargo, its properties or natural loss;
imperceptible in appearance flaws in the container and packaging of the cargo;
insufficiency or ambiguity of marks;
strikes or other circumstances that caused the suspension or restriction of work in whole or in part;
other circumstances arising through no fault of the carrier, his or agents.

In this case, the carrier must prove not only the existence of one of these circumstances, but also that it was due to their occurrence that it became impossible to ensure the safety of the transported cargo.

A special reason for the release of the sea carrier from liability for non-safety of cargo (except for cargo transported in cabotage, i.e. in inland navigation) is a navigational error (Article 167 of the CTM): the carrier is not responsible for the loss or damage delay in its delivery, if it proves that its loss, damage or delay in delivery occurred as a result of an action or inaction in navigation or management of the ship by the captain of the ship, other members of the ship's crew or pilot. This error is opposed to a commercial error (omissions in the acceptance, loading, stowage, transportation and storage of cargo), for which the carrier bears property liability.

The carrier is responsible for the safety of the cargo from the moment it is accepted for transportation and until the moment it is released to the consignee or a person authorized by him, unless he proves that the loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of the cargo occurred due to circumstances that the carrier could not prevent or eliminate due to beyond his control. from his reasons (clause 5, article 34 UATGNET).

In accordance with Art. 118 UZhT the carrier is exempted from loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of cargo accepted for transportation in cases where:

the cargo arrived in a serviceable wagon, container with serviceable locking and sealing devices installed by the consignor, or in serviceable rolling stock without reloading along the route, as well as in the presence of other signs indicating the safety of the cargo;
shortage or damage (spoilage) of cargo occurred due to natural causes associated with the transportation of cargo in open railway rolling stock;
the cargo was transported accompanied by the consignor or consignee;
the shortage of cargo does not exceed the rate of natural loss and the error in measuring the net weight;
loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of the cargo occurred as a result of the consequences caused by unreliable, inaccurate or incomplete information specified by the consignor in the railway bill of lading.

In these cases, the carrier bears property liability for the non-safety of the cargo, if the claimant proves that the loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of the cargo occurred due to the fault of the carrier. Similar rules are contained in Art. 168 KTM, and in paragraph 2 of Art. 118 KVVT.

Damage caused during the carriage of cargo or baggage shall be compensated by the carrier:

in case of loss or shortage of cargo or baggage - in the amount of the value of the lost or missing cargo or baggage;
in case of damage (spoilage) of cargo or baggage - in the amount by which its value has decreased, and if it is impossible to restore the damaged cargo or baggage - in the amount of its value;
in case of loss of cargo or baggage handed over for transportation with the declaration of its value - in the amount of the declared value of the cargo or baggage.

The cost of cargo or baggage is determined based on its price indicated on the seller's invoice or provided for, and in the absence of an invoice or price indicated in the contract, based on the price that, under comparable circumstances, is usually charged for similar goods (clause 2, article 796 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The carrier, along with compensation for the established damage caused by the loss, shortage or damage (spoilage) of cargo or baggage, returns to the sender (recipient) the carriage fee charged for the carriage of the lost, missing, spoiled or damaged cargo or baggage, if this fee is not included in the cost of the cargo .

For the delay in the delivery of cargo (as well as wagons owned by the consignor, consignee or leased by them), the railway carrier, through whose fault the delay was allowed, pays a penalty in the amount of 9% of the cargo transportation fee for each day of delay, but not more than in the amount of the fee for transportation of this cargo (Article 97 UZHT). The carrier can be released from this liability by proving that the delay occurred due to the consignor's failure to pay the freight charge and other payments for previous transportation, the elimination of a malfunction of vehicles threatening life and health of people, or other circumstances beyond the control of the carrier.

For delay in the delivery of cargo under an air carriage agreement, the carrier also pays a fine in the amount of 25% of the minimum wage for each hour of delay, but not more than half of the carriage charge. He is released from liability by proving that the delay occurred due to force majeure, the elimination of an aircraft malfunction that threatens the life or health of the aircraft's passengers, or other circumstances beyond the control of the carrier (Article 120 of the VC).

In inland water transport, for delay in the delivery of goods, the carrier shall pay a penalty in the amount of 9% of the carriage charge for each day of delay, but not more than half of the carriage charge, unless he proves that the delay occurred due to circumstances that he could not prevent and the elimination of which from him did not depend (clause 1, article 116 of the KVVT).

The carrier pays the consignee a penalty for delay in the delivery of goods in the amount of 9% of the freight charge for each day of delay, unless otherwise provided by the contract for the carriage of goods. The total amount of the penalty for delay in the delivery of cargo cannot exceed the amount of its carriage charge. The delay in the delivery of cargo is calculated from twenty-four hours of the day when the cargo was supposed to be delivered, unless otherwise provided by the contract for the carriage of cargo. The basis for charging a penalty for delay in the delivery of goods is a note in the consignment note about the time of arrival of the vehicle at the unloading point (clause 11, article 34 of the Charter of Road Transport and Urban Ground Electric Transport).

Responsibility of the carrier for the goods: Video

Responsibility for delay in delivery of goods. In accordance with Art. 792 of the Civil Code, the carrier is obliged to deliver the goods to the destination within the time limits specified in the manner prescribed by the transport charters and codes, and in the absence of such terms - within a reasonable time. However, the liability of the carrier for violation of this obligation is not directly provided for in the Civil Code. Such responsibility is established by transport charters and codes.

So, according to Art. 111 TCRR (Article 97 UZHT RF) for delay in the delivery of cargo, as well as wagons owned by the consignor, consignee or leased by them, the destination railway or in a direct mixed purpose, the party through whose fault the delay in the delivery of cargo was made, pays a penalty fee of nine percent of the payment for the carriage of goods for each day of delay (incomplete days are considered full), but not more than in the amount of the payment for the carriage of this cargo, unless it proves that the delay occurred as a result of the provisions of Art. 35 of the TCAR (Article 29 of the UZHT RF) circumstances (i.e. due to a delay by the railway in the supply of vehicles due to the consignor's failure to pay the carriage fee and other payments for previous transportation), the elimination of a malfunction of vehicles threatening the life and health of people or other, independent of railway circumstances.

With regard to the elimination of a malfunction of vehicles that threatens the life and health of people, this circumstance serves as the basis for the release of the carrier from liability for delay in the delivery of goods in all cases, regardless of the reasons for the malfunction of the locomotive, wagons or containers, which, therefore, may also occur for reasons associated with the activities of the railway itself. Therefore, this circumstance has nothing to do with the category of guilt.

The norms on the release of the railway from liability for violation of the established deadline for the delivery of goods correspond to paragraph 3 of Art. 401 of the Civil Code, since they provide additional (to the circumstances related to force majeure) grounds that relieve the debtor from liability for violation of an obligation related to entrepreneurial activity.

For the delay in the delivery of cargo carried under the contract for the carriage of goods by air, the carrier shall pay a fine in the amount of 25% of the established federal law the minimum wage for each hour of delay, however, the amount of the specified fine may not exceed 50% of the carriage charge. The carrier is released from liability if it is able to prove that the delay occurred due to force majeure, the elimination of an aircraft malfunction that threatens the life or health of the aircraft's passengers, or other circumstances beyond the control of the carrier (Article 120 of the VC).

In inland water transport, there is a rule according to which, for the delay in the delivery of cargo or towed object, the carrier pays, at the request of the consignee, a penalty in the amount of nine percent of the charge for the carriage of goods or towing of objects for each day of delay, but not more than 50% of the carriage charge in total, if he does not proves that the delay occurred due to circumstances that the carrier could not prevent and the elimination of which did not depend on him (clause 1, article 116 of the KVVT).

It is easy to see that in terms of the type of penalty (penalty) and its size (nine percent of the payment for the carriage of goods), the relevant provisions of the CVVT are "borrowed" from the TRA, but when formulating the upper limit of the carrier's liability (50% of the carriage charge), the corresponding provision of the VC was used.

At the same time, the developers of the KVVT should be given credit for the fact that they approached the issue of the grounds for exempting the carrier from liability for delay in the delivery of goods quite independently. When formulating provisions on the grounds for relieving the carrier from liability for non-compliance with the established delivery period, the ITC (Article 118) included a universal list of specific circumstances recognized as grounds for releasing the carrier from liability for several types of violations of various conditions of the contract of carriage at once, including delay in delivery of the transported goods. This list includes the following circumstances: force majeure, as well as other natural phenomena (flooding or cessation of ships passing under bridges due to high water levels, earthquakes, tornadoes, typhoons, storms, fires, etc.); saving lives of people or property on the water; military actions; stopping or restricting the movement of ships.

In road transport, liability is applied for violation of the delivery time of goods, which is established only in relation to intercity transportation of goods. According to Art. 137 UAT for delay in the delivery of goods for intercity transportation of goods, motor transport organizations pay consignees a fine in the amount of 15% of the freight charge for each day of delay, unless they prove that the delay was not their fault. The total amount of the penalty for delay in the delivery of goods transported by road cannot exceed 90% of the freight charge.

KTM does not define specific liability measures (for example, in the form of a legal penalty) for violation of the terms of the contract for the carriage of goods by sea on the time of its delivery. Such liability may be established by agreement of the parties. At the same time, unless otherwise established by agreement of the parties, the carrier's liability for delay in the delivery of cargo accepted for transportation cannot exceed the amount of freight payable in accordance with the contract for the carriage of cargo by sea (clauses 2 and 5 of article 170 of the KTM).

With regard to the conditions and procedure for the application of such liability, as well as the grounds for exempting the carrier from its application, they are common both to the carrier's liability for delay in the delivery of goods, and liability for the failure of the transported goods.