U.S. Code » Title 49 » Subtitle SUBTITLE IV— INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION › Part PART A— RAIL › Chapter CHAPTER 107— RATES › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— LIMITATIONS

49 U.S.C. § 10743

Liability for payment of rates

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 49 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)(1) Liability for payment of rates for transportation for a shipment of property by a shipper or consignor to a consignee other than the shipper or consignor, is determined under this subsection when the transportation is provided by a rail carrier under this part. When the shipper or consignor instructs the rail carrier transporting the property to deliver it to a consignee that is an agent only, not having beneficial title to the property, the consignee is liable for rates billed at the time of delivery for which the consignee is otherwise liable, but not for additional rates that may be found to be due after delivery if the consignee gives written notice to the delivering carrier before delivery of the property—(A) of the agency and absence of beneficial title; and(B) of the name and address of the beneficial owner of the property if it is reconsigned or diverted to a place other than the place specified in the original bill of lading.(2) When the consignee is liable only for rates billed at the time of delivery under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the shipper or consignor, or, if the property is reconsigned or diverted, the beneficial owner, is liable for those additional rates regardless of the bill of lading or contract under which the property was transported. The beneficial owner is liable for all rates when the property is reconsigned or diverted by an agent but is refused or abandoned at its ultimate destination if the agent gave the rail carrier in the reconsignment or diversion order a notice of agency and the name and address of the beneficial owner. A consignee giving the rail carrier, and a reconsignor or diverter giving a rail carrier, erroneous information about the identity of the beneficial owner of the property is liable for the additional rates.(b) Liability for payment of rates for transportation for a shipment of property by a shipper or consignor, named in the bill of lading as consignee, is determined under this subsection when the transportation is provided by a rail carrier under this part. When the shipper or consignor gives written notice, before delivery of the property, to the line-haul rail carrier that is to make ultimate delivery—(1) to deliver the property to another party identified by the shipper or consignor as the beneficial owner of the property; and(2) that delivery is to be made to that party on payment of all applicable transportation rates;that party is liable for the rates billed at the time of delivery and for additional rates that may be found to be due after delivery if that party does not pay the rates required to be paid under paragraph (2) of this subsection on delivery. However, if the party gives written notice to the delivering rail carrier before delivery that the party is not the beneficial owner of the property and gives the rail carrier the name and address of the beneficial owner, then the party is not liable for those additional rates. A shipper, consignor, or party to whom delivery is made that gives the delivering rail carrier erroneous information about the identity of the beneficial owner, is liable for the additional rates regardless of the bill of lading or contract under which the property was transported. This subsection does not apply to a prepaid shipment of property.(c)(1) A rail carrier may bring an action to enforce liability under subsection (a) of this section. That rail carrier must bring the action during the period provided in section 11705(a) of this title or by the end of the 6th month after final judgment against it in an action against the consignee, or the beneficial owner named by the consignee or agent, under that section.(2) A rail carrier may bring an action to enforce liability under subsection (b) of this section. That carrier must bring the action during the period provided in section 11705(a) of this title or by the end of the 6th month after final judgment against it in an action against the shipper, consignor, or other party under that section.(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, § 102(a), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 819.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 10744 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, § 102(a).

A prior section 10743, Pub. L. 95–473, Oct. 17, 1978, 92 Stat. 1391; Pub. L. 99–521, § 7(i), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2995, related to payment of rates, prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, § 102(a). See section 13707 of this title.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: CSX Transp. Co. v. Novolog Bucks Cnty., 502 F.3d 247 (3rd Cir. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
CSX Transp. Co. v. Novolog Bucks Cnty., 502 F.3d 247 (3rd Cir. 2007). · cites it 9× “We hold that the consignee-agent provision of the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act, 49 U.S.C. § 10743 (a)(1), governs this dispute as to the charges assessed against Novolog as the consignee of freight.”
Wisconsin Cent. Ltd. v. Tienergy, LLC, 894 F.3d 851 (7th Cir. 2018). · cites it 3× “49 U.S.C. § 10743 . Demurrage charges have long been treated as "rates for transportation" under that provision, see CSX Transportation Co.”
Illinois Cent. R.R. Co. v. South Tec Dev. Warehouse, Inc., Defendant-Third Party v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., Third Party, 337 F.3d 813 (3rd Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “The district court reasoned that the only way that South Tec could have escaped liability was to have complied with 49 U.S.C. § 10743 (a)(1), which requires a consignee that is an agent, in order to avoid liability for charges, to provide a carrier with written notice of its…”
Norfolk S. Ry. Co. v. Groves, 586 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “49 U.S.C. § 10743 (a)(1) (1995). Thus, an agent-consignee can avoid demurrage liability by notifying the carrier of its agency status and providing the carrier with the name and address of the shipment’s beneficial owner prior to accepting delivery.”
Interstate Com. Comm'n v. Transcon Lines, a Corp. Leonard L. Gumport, Chapter 7 Tr., 990 F.2d 1503 (9th Cir. 1993). · cites it 4× “The Trustee denied that the ICC had jurisdiction over him in that Transcon was no longer an operating common carrier in interstate commerce.”
In Re: Apex Express Corp. Humboldt Express, Inc., Debtors. Humboldt Express, Inc. v. The Wise Co., Inc., 190 F.3d 624 (4th Cir. 1999). “See 49 U.S.C.A. § 10743 (a), (b) (West 1995).”
Interstate Com. Comm'n v. Transcon Lines, 513 U.S. 138 (1995). · cites it 2× “” 49 U. S. C. §§ 10743 (b)(1), 10743(a). By regulations under this express statutory delegation, the ICC has set out in detail the exclusive means by which common carriers can extend credit to shippers.”
Interstate Com. Comm'n v. Transcon Lines, a Corp. Leonard L. Gumport, Chapter 7 Tr., 968 F.2d 798 (9th Cir. 1992). · cites it 4× “The Trustee further denied that the ICC’s credit regulations were in accordance with the statute authorizing such regulations, 49 U.S.C. § 10743 , and went on to offer three “affirmative defenses,” viz.”
In Re Yurika Foods Corp., Debtor & Debtor-In-Possession. Yurika Foods Corp. v. United Parcel Serv., 888 F.2d 42 (6th Cir. 1989). “UPS may extend credit only in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 10743 , which authorizes the ICC to promulgate regulations.”
Canadian Nat'l Ry. v. Vertis, Inc., 811 F. Supp. 2d 1028 (D.N.J. 2011). · cites it 3× “19 in unpaid freight costs under the Interstate Commerce Act (“ICA”), 49 U.S.C. § 10743 (a)(1). 2 Subsequently, in April 2010, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint against Vertís and American Color Graphics to recover a lesser amount, $263,983.”
Lifschultz Fast Freight, Inc. v. Nat'l Mfg. Co., 804 F. Supp. 1059 (N.D. Ill. 1992). · cites it 3× “Defendant argues that based on 49 U.S.C. § 10743 (b)(1), the Act “delegates to the ICC the exclusive authority to create and determine permissible credit regulations for post delivery payments.”
Interstate Com. Comm'n v. Transcon Lines, a Corp. Leonard L. Gumport, Chapter 7 Tr., 981 F.2d 402 (9th Cir. 1992). · cites it 4× “The Trustee denied that the ICC had jurisdiction over him in that Transcon was no longer an operating common carrier in interstate commerce.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.