Understanding FOBs and Their Role in International Law

This document provides a critical understanding of FOBs and their role within international law. It explains the concept of FOB contracts and their implications in shipping documents. The document also discusses the different types of FOB agreements and the rights and obligations of the parties involved. It is a valuable resource for anyone studying international trade and commercial law.

Assessment

Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
Critical understanding of FOBs and their role within international law................................3
FOB Contract........................................................................................................................4
FOB” used in shipping documents......................................................................................5
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
Free On Board (FOB) is indeed a transportation word often used denoting when items that are
lost or broken during delivery are responsible to the vendor or the customer. "FOB shipping
aspect" or "FOB background" implies that when the vendor boats the goods, the customer is at
danger and needs to take possession of the commodity. Contracts covering international shipping
also provide edited terms of exchange specifying concerns including the location and time of
arrival, payment, where the probability of failure moves again from supplier to the customer, but
which pays for extra shipping charges (Vonk, O., 2012). This financial reporting maintenance is
important even though introducing inventory levels means that the purchaser does not expend the
expenses instantly but this interruption in recognising the expense though an additional cost
impacts net income. The almost always a business orders stock levels, the more expenses this
will incur for transportation and healthcare. A company may indeed raise costs for placing an
order, hiring labour to dump the products and renting a storage facility to hold the items.
MAIN BODY
Critical understanding of FOBs and their role within international law
The Free on Board purchase deal specifies that whenever the items are transported into the
negotiated shipping vessel, the liability of the vendor in the agreement is complete. The buyer
thus covers all the risks of injury or failure that could occur to the products from such a point on.
These charges are not involved in the vendor's receipts or landing tickets. The salesperson is, that
being said, necessary to clear up those things for importation. The seller's responsibilities
throughout the FOB selling deal require the supply of products as per the existing deal with the
purchaser. In compliance with the contracts in this sales touch, a contractual payable must be
produced for the customer. The vendor shall bear only certain costs relating to the clearance of
export goods, such as the acquiring of an export licence again for good and services (Rosenthal,
and Knighton, 2017).
The FOB sales contract requires the business to supply the products to the mentioned in the
contract designated port on same submarine nominated by the consumer at the prescribed time.
The hazards of delay, injury as well as all other expenses must be met by the retailer before the
products have gone through the shipping rails at the buyer's chosen port where the losses are
shifted to the customer. Until the liabilities are passed to the customer, the vendor is still

responsible to cover all the expenses involved with delivering the goods. These costs involve,
amongst other, packing, unloading of subject shipment and securing regulatory approval. It's
really the duty of the vendor to include all documentation relating to the shipping of
merchandise, like shipping notes, arrival documentation, travel records and bank statements
among several other documentation.
The buyer is responsible for supplying the seller with a prompt note of the time and location of
availability, the description of the shipping being used and of the desired port and also for giving
the seller evidence of the distribution of the merchandise and about the performance of the
merchandise (Pearson, 2012). The responsibilities of the purchaser in the FOB communication
involve offering to pay again for food items as supplied throughout the FOB purchase
agreement. In order to have access, the purchaser has the obligation to acquire the operating
licence for the items receipt and to impose all the risks incurred when the products were being
received, in particular loading, unloading and selection of transport, in its favourite port. It is also
the duty of the customer to take over the quantity of products at the terminal. The both parties
should also carry all the potential risks because after items have carried through the boat's tracks
at the planned completion port. In addition, the customer bears all the costs borne by the shipping
of goods until the tracks of the vessels have gone through the shipping place of shipping. This
contains the order fulfilment expenses involved as well as the transportation of products to about
their location. The purchaser is responsible for providing the vendor with a timely notification
including its time and date of shipment, the description of the cargo ship and the favoured port,
and also having to send this same vendor evidence of the receipt of the product and the quality of
the contract.
FOB Contract
In the Pandemico Ltd, it has been identified that 3 kinds of FOB agreements exist,
suggesting the versatility of such agreements.
 FOB agreement Simple or Traditional
 FOB "with supplementary services"
 "FOB" Easy
The dealer is clear of any duty to pay protection and freight throughout the traditional FOB
deal, but undergoes to position the designated vessels and ports of shipping on the finished goods
panel. The purchaser shall select the carrier to receive protection and to cover the expense of

maritime transport to the named port of shipment, plus all other expenses relating to the transport
and discharging of the goods. The seller must, however, procure a fresh invoice bill as well as
submit this to the purchaser along with other documents after the products have passed the
railway or been securely placed onto board ships.
 There are the preceding obligations for the Seller:
 Supply compliant goods in compliance with the terms.
 Supply the products by putting the others on platform the designated ship and
transporting port.
 Charge all charges before shipping, i.e. whenever the products have reached the
railway of the boat securely.
 Acquire export permits and lading bills
 Manufacture a payment receipt
 Delicate records for the purchaser.
This shows that the target amount charged by the dealer would be smaller, because it covers only
the costs of the product, the shipping on shore, the recording of the sale and all costs are related
to the sale before the products have been loaded on board ship. When the items have carried the
expressway of the vessel and also been positioned on the ship, the vendor is exempted from all
responsibility, that is an additional benefit as they does not require to concern about cargo, health
coverage and location expenses as lengthy as it offers the required documents, thus the defining
distinction with such a CIF contract (Moses, 2017).
Buyer 's Obligations:
 Inform the owner of designated vessel as well as point of shipment.
 Receive those products.
 Start charging for the products and additional costs.
The FOB Arrangement is useful for the consumer because it monitors the flow of the
carriage of the items to monitor the period of shipping and negotiates lower insurance including
freight costs by contracting with businesses with which they also conduct business.
FOB” used in shipping documents
The phrase "FOB" is often used in 4 distinct ways actually to freight transport that include:
1. FOB [location of source], Freight Collect
2. FOB [local culture], Prepaid Freight

3. FOB [consider placing of location], Collecting Freight
4. FOB [position of destination], Prepaid Freight
To recognise each classification, the distinction between the point of origin as well as the
location of departure point as well as the collection of cargo vs. payment method freight should
first be understood. The first element of the classification specifies that the consumer recognizes
the vendor's title of the property and the possibility of loss (either when the courier starts picking
up the products for export or when the goods are finally delivered). The second section reveals
accountability for freight costs. 'Prepaid' means that the freight has been paid by the seller;
'collect' means that the buyer is liable for payment (Keesoony, 2016).
Place of Origin vs. Place of Destination:
Place of origin simply states that the buyer implies possession of the delivery the instant the
shipper collects as well as signposts the bill of exchange whilst also location of point of
departure implies the vendor maintains possession and management of the products once they
are supplied. There really is no uncertainty of liability for shipping by indicating who "does
own" the shipping.
Freight Collect vs. Prepaid Freight:
Freight collection means that all fares are the responsibility of the person having received
the consignment. They also presume all dangers as well as, throughout the event of damage, are
able to submit claims. Pre-paid shipping is the reverse and f or all shipping costs and dangers, the
shipping company accepts liability.
Rights and duties of the parties under "FOB" and "CIF"
'Free on Board' delivered the shipment the ship designated by the customer at the shipping place
of shipping or seller delivers too so shipped. Whenever the items are placed the ship, the level
of risk to the goods passes, as well as the buyer contains all expenses from such a point onwards.
The seller must either deliver results on committee the ship or acquire goods that have already
been produced for shipment. The 'procure' connection here caters to numerous chain sells ('string
sales'), especially popular in commodities trades. If the products are turned over to manufacturer
when they are on boarding the vessel, such as goods in boxes that are usually shipped at the port,
FOB will not be sufficient. The FCA law must be used in some rather circumstances (Fine,
Mayall and Sepúlveda, 2017).

The FOB allows the dealer should clear, where appropriate, the products for export. The
vendor has no responsibility; even so, to release the products for importation, to pay the certain
excise tax or to exercise any duty any import customs formalities." Throughout the scenario of a
sales contract, if:
Besides this subchapter, the purchaser would have had the authority to cancel the contract as
a result of the seller's infringement of a phrase implied in article 10, 14 or 15, but the purchaser
will have the obligation to refuse treatment as a result of the vendor's infringement.
The infringement is so small that this would be unrealistic for someone like to refuse to accept
them, because if the purchaser does not come to terms as a customer, the infringement should not
be handled as just a breach of duty, but it may be handled as a contract breach. Pandemico
Ltd will only be entitled to seek damages over the injury they have sustained as a consequence of
the violation and would not be willing to contemplate the deal as rebuked if the infringement is
used by the judiciary as only a breach of warranty. The recommendation for respective
firm should be to enforce the deal on this premise but instead pursue a solution for their failure
(Downing and Hanf, 2013).
Law in this field may develop proper knowledge and understanding for the learner:
As when the court determined in few cases FOB contract terms have very resemblances and
diversity on the basis of various aspects, including the designation of the ship, the supporting
documents as well as the entered into force on 1 of the agreement with the transporter of the
description of the goods. Beginning from such a viewpoint, the very first point demonstrating the
major variations and parallels between the various forms of FOB agreements applies to the
obligation of the negotiating party to designate the vessel to produce the products. The customer
needs to designate the ship to terminate this task that is seen equally in classical and basic FOB
agreements. But at the other side, the structure of the ship is determined in the FOB contracts for
extra facilities as among the purchaser's responsibilities. The explanation why, in FOB
arrangements, the negotiating parties require different categories on this topic is it's always quite
difficult for people to schedule the ship for intercontinental transactions to be loaded at the
terminal. Moreover, arrangements wherein the purchaser had already promised to cover the
higher insurance charges also have been considered by the judiciary as a FOB deal in some
scenarios. Consequently, among classic and simplistic FOB agreements, the conditions of duties
regarding the vessel's assignment are likely to be identical, while FOB leases with extra facilities

contain literally separate terms. It can clearly be included, compared with other forms of FOB
agreements, FOB contract terms with added facilities may be more beneficial for intercontinental
transactions (Cuniberti, 2013).
The second statement has on-board information of transporting goods. The customer is
presented by the owner of the ship with the bill of exchange in classic FOB agreements. The
owner of the cargo ship, consequently, readies the bill of exchange throughout the title of the
purchaser. After all, it could be important for the sellers to protect the items. These day, the bill
of exchange has seldom been rendered and in title of the vendor instead of the identity of the
purchaser. After the main contract has also been duly charged, the seller will accept the bill of
exchange to a purchaser. In relation, purchasers must provide the vendor with data more about
expected time of arrival (ETA) including its appointed vessel. Likewise, there are the same legal
accidents for obtaining the bill of exchange throughout the basic FOB agreements. In the event
of a straightforward FOB contract, there will be only one distinction that perhaps the mate's
invoice is obtained by the vendor in attempt forwarding to the purchaser or the main agent. After
that, the customer agent transfers this with a graft by providing the mate's invoice to the mentor
of the tanker. The vendor is, but at the other side is provided the bill of exchange with extra
services throughout the FOB agreements. Consequently, while it tries to put this same buyer at
risk, the vendor is secure. However if the vendor does not approve the bill of exchange, the
customer could not evident the products from the outlet side. As a result, almost all of the
masterpiece and straightforward FOB agreements have much more health equity in favour of the
purchasers regarding paperwork. Nonetheless, the FOB contract terms with extra features pose a
great threat to the purchasers suffering a loss (Cipolla, 2019).
Last but really not necessarily, in regards to entering into a deal with a carrier to ship the
products, there will still be important variations and parallels between all kinds of FOB
arrangements. In famous FOB agreements, the vendor should be within the responsibility to
make a service agreement with both the transporter on account of the customer to bring the
products decided on upon sale interaction. A lthough the contract was made here between vendor
as well as the container, the purchaser became one of groups to the locomotive agreement.
Although the buyer is already working on account of the customer mostly during ongoing
negotiations in traditional FOB agreements. Consequently, just the customer is allowed to apply
the transporter for this loss or destruction of harm sustained also by transportation of passengers.

But at the another side, in straightforward FOB agreements, the purchaser or his assistant
conducts an obligation to entering into the contract only with carrier. Throughout this case, the
buyer as well as the container are the contractual parties for the transportation of good but do not
agree for the losses (Shue, 2013).
In simpler words, while entering into the agreement with the transporter through the
purchaser's ordinance throughout the famous FOB contract, purchasers are becoming
immediately another of the contractual states to a contract of carriage in straightforward FOB
agreements. In fact, the dealer wants to negotiate only with courier on a deal for the
transportation of goods by ship in FOB arrangements with extra services. The transportation deal
is then made here between dealer as well as the transporter. In other terms, in comparison to
other forms of FOB agreements, the vendor is the only one who can prosecute the carrier for
additional charges in FOB contractual agreements. Given that the bill of exchange is approved
by the purchaser, the customer is now one of the negotiating parties to either the transportation
arrangements and, throughout the event of damage, acquires the power to place the complaint
against both the company before the judge. However, it adds to an immense risk to the prejudice
of any person. Eventually, it may easily be seen as, relative to the FOB agreements with basic
services, traditional as well as basic FOB agreements are highly inclined to secure the interests of
the customer.
FOB arrangements are classified into three distinct categories, representing major variations
and correlations on the basis of the ship's selection, paperwork and arrangement with the airline,
and on the basis of the multiple INCOTERMS. Federal rules are included in the most recent
results of FOB agreements released in INCOTERMS 2010, certainly responding to the existing
conditions of unrestricted trade. In addition to defining a number of forms of FOB contracts,
courts encourage negotiating companies to reach an arrangement that simply represents their
intent. There is quite a similar Classic and Simple FOB. However, the FOB agreement for extra
services contains completely different regulations for threat, price and duty liability. The vendor
could even place oneself in a secure spot throughout this particular instance. This could quickly
be spoken, but at the other side, that the famous FOB agreement is really the buyer's the more
useful contract with regard to its legislation. Compared to the prolonged distance seen between
date of destination as well as the container of load capacity, it is quite tricky for all the purchaser
to make an agreement with the transporter sometimes in trans-oceanic purchases. Taking this

into account, it may be argued that the variations in the versatility of FOB contracts between the
various forms of fob contract developed by the courts remained necessary.
CONCLUSION
In the last, it has been clearly concluded that FOB indicates for certain if products which are
destroyed or damaged all through shipments are held liable by the sender or the receiver. The
classification specifies, often used in an established specific place, the entity is responsible for
paying the shipping costs is at what stage name for the product transfers from the transfer of
ownership. For example, in the case of foreign shipping, 'FOB [name of importing port]' implies
that the merchant (consignor) is accountable for transporting the products to the destination of
delivery including for the expense of processing them. The expense of sea transport, protection,
discharging and shipping from the points of shipment to the end location is paid by the customer
(consignee). Whenever the items are delivered at the identified port, the purchaser moves the
threat towards the buyer.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Cipolla, C. M., 2019. The basic laws of human stupidity: The international bestseller. Random
House.
Cuniberti, G., 2013. The international market for contracts: the most attractive contract laws. Nw.
J. Int'l L. & Bus., 34, p.455.
Downing, P. B. and Hanf, K. I. eds., 2013. International comparisons in implementing pollution
laws. Springer Science & Business Media.
Fine, J. B., Mayall, K. and Sepúlveda, L., 2017. The role of international human rights norms in
the liberalization of abortion laws globally. Health and human rights, 19(1), p.69.
Keesoony, S., 2016. International anti-money laundering laws: the problems with
enforcement. Journal of Money Laundering Control.
Moses, M. L., 2017. The principles and practice of international commercial arbitration.
Cambridge University Press.
Pearson, K. C., 2012. Filial support laws in the modern era: Domestic and international
comparison of enforcement practices for laws requiring adult children to support indigent
parents. Elder LJ, 20, p.269.
Rosenthal, D. E. and Knighton, W. M., 2017. National laws and international commerce: The
problem of extraterritoriality (Vol. 17). Routledge.
Shue, H., 2013. Laws of war, morality, and international politics: Compliance, stringency, and
limits. ljil, 26, p.271.
Vonk, O., 2012. Dual nationality in the European Union: A study on changing norms in public
and private international law and in the municipal laws of four EU member states.
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.