此外，承运人在其提单背面条款第25条（5）规定的免责条件是：：“Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary contained within this Bill of Lading, where in accordance with local legislation all import cargo is discharged into the custody of the port authority or customs and such agencies in turn are solely responsible for the correct release of the cargo to the rightful consignee upon presentation of the pertinent documentation and payment of relevant customs duties , taxes, dues and any other charges. Therein such countries neither upon presentation of the pertinent documentation and payment of relevant customs duties, taxes , dues and any other charges. Then in such countries neither the Carrier nor its agents will be responsible or liable in the event of incorrect release of the cargo after its delivery to the port authority or customs by the Carrier（证据14）。亦即只有正当的收货人提交了有关的文件的前提下，承运人才能够免责。而本案原告仍持有全套正本提单，因此收货人不可能呈交“pertinent documentation”.因面也有不符合其自订的免责条件，当然其无权主张免责。关健在于确认该 “相关的文件”是否指正本提单或包括担保文件。如果指前者，则承运人肯定必须承担错误交货之责，如果包括后者，则该担保是向谁提交，如果向当局提交则承运人亦有义务向当局主张担保之债权。如果向承运人提交，则承运人更是难辞其责。
　　收货人是否实际上已提取货人亦是个问题。买方12月12日称：“we can open the containers with a GUARANTEE of an insurance company that we are going to give the original Bill of lading in the future.” “there weren’t any sign that the seal was touched before”（证据13）。Maritime del Caribe Dominican. S.A.MCD 2000年11月9日e-mail 称：“收货人已提取集装箱”（the consignee already picked up said container）。被告于2000年11月14日传真称：“该集装箱运抵接收人的仓库原铅封完好无损”（证据7）11月27日被告传真再次重申该主张（即该集装箱运抵接收人的仓库原铅封完好无损）（证据10）。因此从表面证据上分析，买方很可能已提取货物。
　　(三)适用法律与管辖法院
　　提单背面条款规定:Law and Jurisdiction. Any claim or dispute under this Bill of lading shall be determined , at determined , at Carrier’s option, by the law and courts of the country where the Carrier has its principal place of business, or the country of shipment or delivery , or at the port of loading or discharge.

第 [1] [2] [3] [4] 页 共[5]页