海上貨物運送人之責任期間，「戶至戶」之運送範圍顯然包括海上與陸上，此一「收受到交付」之全運送路段，是否全部為海商法(海法)所適用亦或有民法(陸法)適用，學界有「單一說」與「分割說」之爭。《鹿特丹規則》第12條第1款規定，「運送人根據本公約對貨物的責任期間，自運送人或履約方為運送而接收貨物時開始，至貨物交付時終止」，擴大適用範圍，採取了「海運+其他」模式，調整的不只是海運部分，倘產生與其他國際公約之衝突時，應依第26條與第82條來解決，惟適用範圍與適用順序有爭議；本文認為，基於海上貨物運送人責任「單一說」之理論前提，第26條為第12條的例外，有「例外從嚴解釋原則」之適用，而第26條與第82條性質不同，依「先程序後實體原則」，第82條應優先適用。

Regarding to the period of responsibility of marine carriers, the “door-to-door” delivery occurs at sea and in land obviously. We have the dispute between “theory of single responsibility” and “theory of separated responsibility” in Taiwan academia if it is applied to the maritime law (sea law) only or the civil law (land law) included. Paragraph 1 of article 12 (period of responsibility of the carrier) of the Rotterdam Rules says, “The period of responsibility of the carrier for the goods under this convention begins when the carrier or a performing party receives the goods for carriage and ends when the goods are delivered.” The application is extended as the mode of “shipping plus other” that not adjusted for maritime transportation only. Articles 26 and 82 could deal with those accordingly if any conflicts happen among other international conventions. However, the application and priority of these articles are still confused. In this article, based on the legislation from the spirit of “theory of single responsibility” in the carriage of goods by sea, article 26 is the exception of article 12 and it could be applied to the principle of strict explanation for exception. The principles of explanation to articles 26 and 82 are different essentially. We apply article 82 firstly because of the priority application of procedure law.