If the Shipowner proves that prima facie the cause of damage was excepted，the burden of proof shifts to ______.A.the ShipownerB.the shipperC.the ChartererD.the carrier

If the Shipowner can only show that some part of the damage to the goods was due to a cause within the exception， he must also show how much of the damage is comprised in that part， otherwise he is liable ________ ．

A.for the part

B.for the whole

C.for the parts of damage not due to causes within the exception

D.for the parts of damage due to causes within the exception

The prima facie rule that the law of the flag governs contracts of carriage by sea ______ the paramount rule of the intention of the parties，which may be express，or implied from the circumstances of the sea．

A.subject to

B.subjects to

C.subjects

D.is subject to

The ______ shall bear the burden of proof with respect to the loss，damage or delay in delivery resulting from the other cause．

A.carrier

B.shipper

C.consigner

D.consignee

材料:

Some older decisions have held that the carrier，in order to rebut the presumption of liability resulting from the arrival in damaged condition of GOODs shipped undamaged，must prove not only that the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils，but also that the harm did not result from any negligence on the carrier&39;s part．

Most more recent decisions and authors，however，uphold the view that，in general，the carrier may rebut the claimant&39;s prima facie case simply by proving that the loss was caused by an excepted peril．At that point，the onus switches to the cargo claimant to prove that the true cause of the loss was the carrier&39;s negligence．

Nevertheless certain Hague and Hague/Visby Rules exceptions，expressly or implicitly，also require the carrier to negative its own negligence in proving the exception itself．For example，a clause in the said rules expressly imposes on the carrier the burden of proving that the loss or damage occurred without its actual fault or privity and without any fault or neglect on the part of its servants or agents．

The carrier，however，must truly prove the existence of one or more of the exceptions and their causative role in respect of the loss or damage．Conjectures and speculation do not take the place of hard evidence．A court has held：“Mere speculation will not overcome the prima facie evidence of a clean bill of lading”．

问题：

The carrier will be held liable for the loss or damage if _______．

A.it is proved that he has privity to the loss or damage

B.it is proved that the fault or neglect on his part is not the true cause of the loss or damage

C.it is too onerous for him to demonstrate that the loss or damage is caused by what is beyond his control

D.if there are conjectures and speculation

In accordance with old decisions，the carrier will not be excused unless he has proved that _______．A.not only the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils，but also that the harm did not result from any negligence on the his part

B.the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils

C.the harm did not result from any negligence on his part

D.there are conjectures and speculation

In accordance with most more recent decisions and authors，the carrier will not be excused unless he has proved that _______．A.not only the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils，but also that the harm did not result from any negligence on the his part

B.the loss or damage was caused by one of the excepted perils

C.the harm did not result from any negligence on his part

D.there are conjectures and speculation

It is concluded that _______．A.The carrier is not in a position to prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils

B.It can not be decided that whether the carrier has to prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils because there are some differences between the decisions and authors and requirements of Hague and Hague/Visby Rules

C.The carrier does not have to prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils due to the fact that there are some differences between the decisions and authors and requirements of Hague and Hague/Visby Rules

D.The carrier must truly prove the loss or damage is substantially caused by one or more of the excepted perils even there are some differences between the decisions and authors and requirements of Hague and Hague/Visby Rules

请帮忙给出每个问题的正确答案和分析，谢谢！

As freight is prima facie payable on delivery of the goods， the burden of making out a case for advance freight is on ________．

A.the shipper

B.consignee

C.the shipowner

D.consigner

If it is clear that the damage must have arisen either from bad stowage or from perils of the sea，and are excepted，in order to escape liability the Shipowner must show that the damage arose from the latter．“the latter”refers to ______

A.the Shipowner

B.bad stowage

C.perils of the sea

D.the shipper

材料：

The fact that the GOODs were damaged raises a prima facie case of negligence which can only be cleared by the carrier by showing what actually occurred. For example，a ship carried grain on MS Great Lakes to a port where it was stored aboard the ship under a special storage contract for 22 days after which it was discovered to be wet．Rough weather during the voyage was alleged but the Court insisted on strict proof of how and when the rough weather caused the wetting．

Therefore，to rebut the presumption of fault when relying upon its own reasonable care，the carrier must further prove that the damage was caused by something other than its own negligence．Once the shipper establishes a prima facie case，under“the policy of the law”the carrier must“explain what took place or suffer the consequences”．The law casts upon the carrier the burden of the loss which it cannot explain or，explaining，bring within the exception case in which he is relieved from liability．

问题：

The best title of this passage is ______．

A.The liabilities on the part of the carrier and shipper

B.Loss of and damage to cargoes

C.The burden of proof on the part of the shipper

D.The burden of proof on the part of the carrier

It is concluded from this passage that MS Great Lakes ______．A.was liable for the wet damage if it could not prove how and when the rough weather caused the wetting

B.was liable for the wet damage even it could prove how and when the rough weather caused the wetting

C.was liable for the wet damage even it could not prove how and when the rough weather caused the wetting

D.was not liable for the wet damage if it could not prove how and when the rough weather caused the wetting

According to this passage，_______．A.If a carrier cannot bring the reason of the loss into the exception case in which he is relieved from liability，he is liable for the loss

B.Even a carrier can bring the reason of the loss into the exception case in which he is relieved from liability，he is still held liable for the loss by the court

C.Should a carrier bring the reason of the loss into the exception case in which he is relieved from liability，he could be held liable for the loss by the court

D.Should a carrier not bring the reason of the loss into the exception case in which he is relieved from liability，he could not be held liable for the loss by the court

The prima facie case of negligence in this passage refers to the one in which ______．A.a presumption of fault was made on the part of the carrier

B.a presumption of fault was made on the part of the shipper

C.a reasonable care was used by the carrier

D.a reasonable care was used by the shipper

请帮忙给出每个问题的正确答案和分析，谢谢！