نقدی بر مرور زمان طرح دعوی علیه بارفرابر در نظام حقوقی ایران از منظر اسناد حقوقی بین‌المللی

بارفرابری امروزه نقش کلیدی در توسعه و ثبات صنعت حمل و نقل بین‌المللی کالا ایفاء می‌کند و بارفرابران دیگر همانند گذشته صرفاً نماینده صاحب کالا برای راهبری عملیات حمل نیستند بلکه بیشتر در قامت متصدی حمل ترکیبی طیف گسترده‌ای از خدمات از جمله حمل کالا را به مشتریان ارائه می‌دهند. در ایران، شورای عالی هماهنگی ترابری در سال 1377 آئین‌نامه‌ای را با عنوان آئین‌نامه تاسیس و فعالیت شرکتهای حمل و نقل بین‌المللی تصویب نمود که بند 3 ماده 21 آن مرور زمان طرح دعوی علیه بارفرابر را 90 روز تعیین نموده است. وضع چنین بازه کوتاه مدتی برای طرح دعوا نه تنها صاحبان کالا را برای وصول خسارت در فرض تلف کالا یا آسیب بدان با مشقت جدی مواجه خواهد ساخت بلکه این پرسشهای جدی را به ذهن متبادر می‌نماید که آیا چنین مقرره‌ای همسو با ضابطه پذیرفته شده در اسناد حقوقی بین‌المللی از جمله قواعد نمونه فیاتا راجع به خدمات بارفرابری می‌باشد؟ آیا شورای عالی هماهنگی ترابری قانوناً مجاز به وضع چنین مرور زمانی است؟ آیا حکم این مقرره با وجود ماده 393 قانون تجارت اعتبار دارد؟ بررسی اسناد بین‌المللی مختلف حاکم در زمینه فعالیت بارفرابری حکایت از وجود بازه 9 ماهه برای طرح دعوی علیه بار فرابر دارد. همچنین وضع مرور زمان نیازمند مداخله قانونگذار دارد و شورای عالی هماهنگی ترابری فاقد صلاحیت برای چنین اقدامی باشد. در نهایت حکم بند 3 ماده 21 آئین‌نامه در تعارض با حکمی است که در ماده 393 قانون تجارت بیان شده است.

a critique on the time bar to bring lawsuit against the forwarder in the iranian legal system from the perspective of international legal documents

today, freight forwarding plays a key role in the development and stability of international transport of goods and freight forwarders are no longer just agents of cargo owners to manage transport operations, but rather provide a wide range of services to customers, including transportation of goods, as a combined transport operator. in iran, the supreme council for transport coordination approved a bylaw entitled establishment and operation of international transport companies in 2017, in which paragraph 3 of article 21 sets 90 days as a time bar for filing a lawsuit against a forwarder. determination of such a short period for filing a lawsuit shall not only encounter cargo owners with serious difficulties in claiming damages in the event of loss of or damage to the goods but also raises serious questions that is such a rule in line with the rules accepted in international legal documents, including fiata model rules for freight forwarding services? is supreme council for transport coordination legally allowed to impose such a time bar? is this rule valid despite article 393 of the commercial code? examination of various international legal documents governing freight forwarding activity indicates the existence of 9 months for filing a lawsuit against the freight forwarder. also, imposing a time bar requires the involvement of the parliament, and the supreme council for transport coordination is not competent to take such an action. finally, the provision of paragraph 3 of article 21 of the bylaw conflicts with the provision stated in article 393 of the commercial code.today, freight forwarding plays a key role in the development and stability of international transport of goods and freight forwarders are no longer just agents of cargo owners to manage transport operations, but rather provide a wide range of services to customers, including transportation of goods, as a combined transport operator. in iran, the supreme council for transport coordination approved a bylaw entitled establishment and operation of international transport companies in 2017, in which paragraph 3 of article 21 sets 90 days as a time bar for filing a lawsuit against a forwarder. determination of such a short period for filing a lawsuit shall not only encounter cargo owners with serious difficulties in claiming damages in the event of loss of or damage to the goods but also raises serious questions that is such a rule in line with the rules accepted in international legal documents, including fiata model rules for freight forwarding services? is supreme council for transport coordination legally allowed to impose such a time bar? is this rule valid despite article 393 of the commercial code? examination of various international legal documents governing freight forwarding activity indicates the existence of 9 months for filing a lawsuit against the freight forwarder. also, imposing a time bar requires the involvement of the parliament, and the supreme council for transport coordination is not competent to take such an action. finally, the provision of paragraph 3 of article 21 of the bylaw conflicts with the provision stated in article 393 of the commercial code.