Dear Gurus,
Could you kindly tell me what is the difference between MAWB & HAWB, about subject i am little bit confuse. Please explain depely if possibel give examples.
i shell be very greatful to you all.
Looking forward for your favorbale reply.
Tnx & Rgrds,
Syed Ali Zaidi
What is the difference b/w MAWB & HAWB.
-
picant
- Posts: 2026
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:49 pm
UCP point of view
Hi Pals,
from a strictly UCP 600 point of view difference is only in the signature.
MAWB will be signed by issuing carrier or its agent,
HAWB will be signed by issuing consolidator or its agent.
than many opinions have been issued, see lcviews.com , DC insight vol. 1 n. 4 autumn 1995 pag.10, but IATA The Air Cargo Tariff is quite clear:
DEFINITION
-an AWB shall be either an AWB referred to as an "Airline Air Waybill" with preprinted issuing carrier identification or an AWB referred to as a "Neutral Air Waybill" without preprinted identification of the carrier in any form.
USE OF AIR WAYBILL
-the Air Waybill may only be used
--for transportation of individual shipments
--for transportation of consolidated shipments
Note:
For the individual shipments in a consolidation shipment the consolidator must use its own "House waybill" an not "Airline Air Waybill
Hoping to have been clear and wait for many other comments, thanks
Ciao
from a strictly UCP 600 point of view difference is only in the signature.
MAWB will be signed by issuing carrier or its agent,
HAWB will be signed by issuing consolidator or its agent.
than many opinions have been issued, see lcviews.com , DC insight vol. 1 n. 4 autumn 1995 pag.10, but IATA The Air Cargo Tariff is quite clear:
DEFINITION
-an AWB shall be either an AWB referred to as an "Airline Air Waybill" with preprinted issuing carrier identification or an AWB referred to as a "Neutral Air Waybill" without preprinted identification of the carrier in any form.
USE OF AIR WAYBILL
-the Air Waybill may only be used
--for transportation of individual shipments
--for transportation of consolidated shipments
Note:
For the individual shipments in a consolidation shipment the consolidator must use its own "House waybill" an not "Airline Air Waybill
Hoping to have been clear and wait for many other comments, thanks
Ciao
-
shahriar
- Posts: 923
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:03 am
- First Name: Shahriar
- Last Name: Masum
- Organization: Mutual Trust Bank
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
- Location: Bangladesh
UCP got it wrong
certainly picant is right from UCP point of view. however consolidator should be replaced by freight forwarder. do u agree?
anyway, my personal opinion is UCP has got the idea wrong or too generalized. i have read numerous references from transport industry where a HBL or HAWB is signed by a NVOC in the capacity of the carrier. but ISBP says that if the term is used it will allow the freight forwarder to sign. if this is correct, then ICC opinion 621 (i think this is the correct reference) is not correct. but i think the opinion is correct. i have also seen some transport experts sharply criticizing the ICC opinion. im not saying that they are wrong. in fact what i have learned to analyze the topic. but i am still to be convinced. i will appreciate if some one help me understand it.
anyway, my personal opinion is UCP has got the idea wrong or too generalized. i have read numerous references from transport industry where a HBL or HAWB is signed by a NVOC in the capacity of the carrier. but ISBP says that if the term is used it will allow the freight forwarder to sign. if this is correct, then ICC opinion 621 (i think this is the correct reference) is not correct. but i think the opinion is correct. i have also seen some transport experts sharply criticizing the ICC opinion. im not saying that they are wrong. in fact what i have learned to analyze the topic. but i am still to be convinced. i will appreciate if some one help me understand it.
-
dholat
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 10:01 pm
ooooooooooo
oooooooooo shahriar.... thats a fair blow. i dare to comment on it. but i think UCP is for bankers and we just made it in our way!! :lol:
-
iLC
- Posts: 504
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:33 pm
right and wrong
if words and meanings are taken to so pin point accuracy, i think one cannot even say that a freight forwarder can sign a bill of lading / a transport document. historically freight forwarder are only involved in arranging transport for their clients. they are nothing by a agent. the transport industry is so dynamic that the meaning of a word keep on changing even among different carrier. of course HAWB and MAWB is not such a word and has standard definition.
anyway, i dont think that UCP got the idea wrong. first thing is that UCP does not distinguish between a HAWB and MAWB. even ISBP doesnt either. rather i believe that signing authority about HAWB should not be covered under ISBP. to me its a ambiguous term. if i am not wrong then many airline has internal cooperation among them. so its not necessary that you booked your cargo with emirates and it will go by emirates. it can be transported by Singapore airline rather. in this case the actual carrier is obviously issuing a document to the acting carrier. will someone call emirates a freight forwarder here. i dont think.
anyway, i dont think that UCP got the idea wrong. first thing is that UCP does not distinguish between a HAWB and MAWB. even ISBP doesnt either. rather i believe that signing authority about HAWB should not be covered under ISBP. to me its a ambiguous term. if i am not wrong then many airline has internal cooperation among them. so its not necessary that you booked your cargo with emirates and it will go by emirates. it can be transported by Singapore airline rather. in this case the actual carrier is obviously issuing a document to the acting carrier. will someone call emirates a freight forwarder here. i dont think.