D.C. Code § 28:7-301
(b) If goods are loaded by the issuer of a bill of lading;
“Value”. Section 1-204.
“Receipt of Goods”. Section 2-103.
“Purchaser.” Section 1-201.
“Party”. Section 1-201.
“Notice”. Section 1-202.
“Issuer”. Section 7-102.
“Holder”. Section 1-201.
“Goods”. Section 7-102.
“Good faith”. Section 1-201 [7-102].
“Duly negotiate”. Section 7-501.
“Document of Title”. Section 1-201.
“Consignee”. Section 7-102.
Definitional Cross References: “Bill of lading”. Section 1-201.
Cross References:Sections 7-203, 7-309 and 7-501.
5. The word “freight” in the former Section 7-301 has been changed to “goods” to conform to international and domestic land transport usage in which “freight” means the price paid for carriage of the goods and not the goods themselves. Hence, changing the word “freight” to the word “goods” is a clarifying change that fits both international and domestic practice.
4. The shipper’s erroneous report to the carrier concerning the goods may cause damage to the carrier. Subsection (e) therefore provides appropriate indemnity.
3. This section is a restatement of existing law as to the method by which a bailee may avoid responsibility for the accuracy of descriptions which are made by or in reliance upon information furnished by the depositor or shipper. The wording in this section — “contents or condition of contents of packages unknown” or “shipper’s weight, load and count” — to indicate that the shipper loaded the goods or that the carrier does not know the description, condition, or contents of the loaded packages continues to be appropriate as commonly understood in the transportation industry. The reasons for this wording are as important in 2002 as when the prior section initially was approved. The issuer is liable on documents issued by an agent, contrary to instructions of his principal, without receiving goods. No disclaimer of this liability is permitted since it is not a matter either of the care of the goods or their description.
2. The language of the pre-Code Uniform Bills of Lading Act suggested that a carrier is ordinarily liable for damage caused by improper loading, but may relieve itself of liability by disclosing on the bill that shipper actually loaded. A more accurate statement of the law is that the carrier is not liable for losses caused by act or default of the shipper, which would include improper loading. D. H. Overmyer Co. v. Nelson Brantley Glass Go., 168 S.E.2d 176 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969). There was some question whether under pre-Code law a carrier was liable even to a good faith purchaser of a negotiable bill for such losses, if the shipper’s faulty loading in fact caused the loss. Subsection (d) permits the carrier to bar, by disclosure of shipper’s loading, liability to a good faith purchaser. There is no implication that decisions such as Modern Tool Corp. v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 100 F.Supp. 595 (D.N.J.1951), are disapproved.
Purposes: 1. This section continues the rules from former Section 7-301 with one substantive change. The obligations of the issuer of the bill of lading under former subsections (2) and (3) were limited to issuers who were common carriers. Subsections (b) and (c) apply the same rules to all issuers not just common carriers. This section is compatible with the policies stated in the federal Bills of Lading Act, 49 U.S.C. § 80113 (2000).
Changes: Changes for clarity, style and to recognize deregulation in the transportation industry.
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Former Section 7-301.
“Value”. Section 1-201.
“Receipt of goods”. Section 2-103.
“Purchaser”. Section 1-201.
“Party”. Section 1-201.
“Notice”. Section 1-201.
“Issuer”. Section 7-102.
“Holder”. Section 1-201.
“Goods”. Section 7-102.
“Good faith”. Section 1-201.
“Duly negotiate”. Section 7-501.
“Document”. Section 7-102.
“Consignee”. Section 7-102.
Definitional Cross References: “Bill of lading”. Section 1-201.
Cross References:Sections 7-203 and 7-309.
4. The shipper’s erroneous report to the carrier concerning the goods may cause damage to the carrier. Subsection (5) therefore provides appropriate indemnity.
3. This section is a simplified restatement of existing law as to the method by which a bailee may avoid responsibility for the accuracy of descriptions which are made by or in reliance upon information furnished by the depositor or shipper. The issuer is liable on documents issued by an agent, contrary to instructions of his principal without receiving goods. No disclaimer of this liability is permitted since it is not a matter either of the care of the goods or their description.
2. The language of the old Uniform Act suggested that a carrier is ordinarily liable for damage caused by improper loading, but may relieve himself of liability by disclosing on the bill that shipper actually loaded. A more accurate statement of the law is that the carrier is not liable for losses caused by act or default of the shipper, which would include improper loading. There is some question whether under present law a carrier is liable even to a good faith purchaser of a negotiable bill for such losses, if the shipper’s faulty loading in fact caused the loss. It is this doubtful liability which subsection (4) permits the carrier to bar by disclosure of shipper’s loading. There is no implication that decisions such as Modern Tool Corp. v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 100 F.Supp. 595 (D.N.J.1951), are disapproved.
Purposes of Changes: 1. The provision as to misdating in subsection (1) conforms to the policy of the amendment to the Federal Bills of Lading Act by 44 Stat. 1450 (1927), as amended 49 U.S.C. Section 102, after the holding in Browne v. Union Pac. R. Co., 113 Kan. 726, 216 P. 299 (1923)267 U.S. 255, 45 S.Ct. 315, 69 L.Ed. 601 (1925). Subsections (2) and (3) conform to the policy of the Federal Bills of Lading Act, 49 U.S.C. Sections 100, 101, and the laws of several states. See, e.g., N.Y.Pers.Prop.Law Section 209; Report of N.Y. Law Revision Commission, N.Y.Leg.Doc. (1941) No. 65(F).
Changes: Rewritten in part.
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Section 23, Uniform Bills of Lading Act.
Dec. 30, 1963, 77 Stat. 723, Pub. L. 88-243, § 1
Apr. 9, 1997, D.C. Law 11-255, § 27(ww), 44 DCR 1271
Apr. 27, 2013, D.C. Law 19-299, § 9, 60 DCR 2634
1973 Ed., § 28:7-301.
1981 Ed., § 28:7-301.