The security of systems, services and data is an important aspect. These components must therefore be protected from internal and external attacks. Often, a contract does not clearly define the services it covers. As a result, the following clauses are open to several statements. For example, the sender often thinks that “Warehousing” refers to the entire service package, from entry to memory to output. For a logistics service provider, “Warehousing” can only refer to storage. If the contract does not clearly define services that fall within the title “storage,” CCP and liability clauses may be interpreted differently. In the event of outsourcing the maintenance activities of a production organization, the maintenance company has not sufficiently defined the conditions it has set for a certain availability of the facilities. Subsequently, they refused to regulate the contractual “malus” because the production had not provided the facilities sufficiently to be able to perform preventive maintenance. As this was not foreseen in WADA, it was a source of debate and frustration for both parties. A good prior risk analysis is therefore essential. This can be done through a number of known techniques such as FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) and can be secured by an ISO31000 management system.
With a logistics contract, shippers naturally want to be sure that the logistics service provider treats its goods with care. A fine for damage to the merchandise is a stick behind the door, which must ensure that the lot is treated with care and that everything is done to avoid damage. But what about the additional costs associated with the deterioration or loss of a product? For example, in the case of a missed/cancelled order, a missed flight or a delay in the delivery of the order. Logically, the latter two are an example of damage or delays caused by a direct or indirect error by the logistics service provider. The inclusion or non-inclusion of a liability clause for the logistics service provider in a contract often leads to complex discussions. This clause often has more to do with the fact that one wants to insure against commercial risks than with the original purpose of the liability clause: to be convinced that the goods are treated with care.