District of Columbia Code
Part 1 - General
§ 28:7–103. Relation of article to treaty or statute

(a) This article is subject to any treaty or statute of the United States or regulatory statute of the District of Columbia to the extent the treaty, statute, or regulatory statute is applicable.
(b) This article does not modify or repeal any law prescribing the form or content of a document of title or the services or facilities to be afforded by a bailee, or otherwise regulating a bailee’s business in respects not specifically treated in this article. However, violation of such a law does not affect the status of a document of title that otherwise is within the definition of a document of title.
(c) This article modifies, limits, and supersedes the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, approved June 30, 2000 (114 Stat. 464; 15 U.S.C. § 7001, et seq.), but does not modify, limit, or supersede section 101(c) of that act (15 U.S.C. § 7001(c)) or authorize electronic delivery of any of the notices described in section 103(b) of that act (15 U.S.C. § 7003(b)).
(d) To the extent there is a conflict between Chapter 49 of Subtitle II of this title, the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, and this article, this article governs.
(Dec. 30, 1963, 77 Stat. 719, Pub. L. 88-243, § 1; Apr. 27, 2013, D.C. Law 19-299, § 9, 60 DCR 2634.)
1981 Ed., § 28:7-103.
1973 Ed., § 28:7-103.
The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws has noted that in states that have not enacted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act in some form, states should consider their own state laws to determine whether there is a conflict between the provisions of this article and those laws particularly as those other laws may affect electronic documents of title.
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: None.
Purposes: 1. To make clear what would of course be true without the Section, that applicable Federal law is paramount.
2. To make clear also that regulatory state statutes (such as those fixing or authorizing a commission to fix rates and prescribe services, authorizing different charges for goods of different values, and limiting liability for loss to the declared value on which the charge was based) are not affected by the Article and are controlling on the matters which they cover. Notice that the reference is not only to such statutes, but to tariffs, classifications and regulations filed or issued pursuant to them.
Cross References:Sections 7-201, 7-202, 7-204, 7-206, 7-309, 7-401, 7-403.
Definitional Cross Reference: “Bill of lading”. Section 1-201.
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Former Sections 7-103 and 10-104.
Changes: Deletion of references to tariffs and classifications; incorporation of former Section 10-104 into subsection (b), provide for intersection with federal and state law governing electronic transactions.
Purposes: 1. To make clear what would of course be true without the Section, that applicable Federal law is paramount.
2. To make clear also that regulatory state statutes (such as those fixing or authorizing a commission to fix rates and prescribe services, authorizing different charges for goods of different values, and limiting liability for loss to the declared value on which the charge was based) are not affected by the Article and are controlling on the matters which they cover unless preempted by federal law. The reference in former Section 7-103 to tariffs, classifications, and regulations filed or issued pursuant to regulatory state statutes has been deleted as inappropriate in the modern era of diminished regulation of carriers and warehouses. If a regulatory scheme requires a carrier or warehouse to issue a tariff or classification, that tariff or classification would be given effect via the state regulatory scheme that this Article recognizes as controlling. Permissive tariffs or classifications would not displace the provisions of this act, pursuant to this section, but may be given effect through the ability of parties to incorporate those terms by reference into their agreement.
3. The document of title provisions of this act supplement the federal law and regulatory state law governing bailees. This Article focuses on the commercial importance and usage of documents of title. State ex. rel Public Service Commission v. Gunkelman & Sons, Inc., 219 N.W.2d 853 (N.D. 1974).
4. Subsection (c) is included to make clear the interrelationship between the federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act and this article and the conforming amendments to other articles of the Uniform Commercial Code promulgated as part of the revision of this article. Section 102 of the federal act allows a State statute to modify, limit, or supersede the provisions of Section 101 of the federal act. See the comments to Revised Article 1, Section 1-108.
5. Subsection (d) makes clear that once this article is in effect, its provisions regarding electronic commerce and regarding electronic documents of title control in the event there is a conflict with the provisions of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act or other applicable state law governing electronic transactions.
Cross References:Sections 1-108, 7-201, 7-202, 7-204, 7-206, 7-309, 7-401, 7-403.
Definitional Cross Reference: “Bill of lading”. Section 1-201.

Structure District of Columbia Code