Carriage of Goods

Home ] Up ] Alena v. Harlequin Transport ] Alimport ] American Home Assurance v. CSX Lines ] Anchor v. Alianca ] APL v. Voss Peer ] Asil Gida v. Cosco Qingdao (2) ] Asoma Corp. v. SK Shipping ] M/V Atlantic Concert ] 'Berge Sisar' ] Bhatia Shipping v. Alcobex Metals ] BNP Parisbas v. Bandung Shipping ] Bunge SA v. ADM do Brasilia ] Carewins v. Bright Fortune (CFA) ] Center Optical ] China Airlines v. Phillips HK ] MV "Cita" - Supreme Court ] Cosco v. Tokio F&M ] Daewoo v. Klipriver CofA ] Dairy Containers v. Tasman Orient Line (PC) ] Datec Electronic Holdings v UPS (HofL) ] 'Delos' ] Demand Shipping ] Dessert Service v. MSC Jamie Rafaela ] DFS v. Swissair ] In re M/V "DG Harmony" CofA ] East West v. DKBS 1912 CofA ] El Greco v. MSC ] 'Elpa' ] Ericsson v. KLM ] Euro Cellular v. Danzas ] Europe Gas Turbines ] Ferrostaal v. M/V Sea Baisen ] Ferro Union v. m/v Tamamonta ] Fireman's Fund v. OOCL ] Frans Maas (UK) v. Samsung Electronics (UK) ] Fujitsu Computers v. Bax Global ] German Law: Causation under CMR ] German Supreme Court Decision I ZR 138/04 ] Glencore v. Cherry CofA ] Granville Oil v. Davies Turner CofA ] Happy Ranger CofA ] Hirdaramani v. OCS ] Indemnity Insurance v. Hanjin Shipping ] Jarl Trä v. Convoys ] Jindal Iron v. Islamic Solidarity HofL ] Kinetics v. Cross Seas ] Kirby v. Norfolk South'n ] Kithan v. A&G Int'l. ] MacWilliam v. MSC (HofL) ] Maersk Sealand v. Ali Hussein Akar ] Maersk Sealand v. Far East Trading & Others ] 'Michael S' ] Mitsubishi v. Eastwind Transport ] MSC v. Trafigura (CofA) ] NDAL v. Delta Lloyd & Others ] Netstal-Maschinen v. Dons Transport ] Norfolk Southern v. Kirby ] NZ China Clays v. Tasman Orient Line ] Oriental Air ] Pacific Carriers v. BNP Paribas ] Parsons v. Owners of "Happy Ranger" ] Patec v. Translink ] Primetrade v. Ythan ] Quantum v. AF   CofA ] Rapiscan v. Global ] Rosewood Trucking v. Balaam ] Royal & Sun Alliance v. MK Digital ] Sandeman v. TTI ] Schramm v. Shipco Transport ] Sea Success v. African Maritime ] Siemens v. Schenker (High Court) ] Seapower ] Senator v. Sunway ] Serena Navigation v. Dera ] Sompo Japan v Union Pacific ] Starlight Exports v CTO (HK) ] 'Starsin' HofL ] Steel Coils Inc. v. M/V Lake Marion ] Steelmet ] Sunlight Mercantile v. Ever Lucky Shipping (CofA) ] T Comedy v E M T ] The Brij ] The 'David A' ] The "Pacific Vigorous" ] TICC v. Cosco ] TNT Global v. Denfleet Int.'l (CofA) ] Toll (FGCT) v. Alphapharm ] Trafigura v. Golden Stavraetos CofA ] Trane v. Hanjin ] Transport Insurer of 'X' v. Freight Forwarder 'Y' ] Transport Insurer of X v. Freight Forwarder Y (2) ] Transport Insurer of M v. D Railroad ] UCO Bank v. Golden Shore ] Vastfame Camera v. Birkart Globistics ] Weintraub v. ETA Transportation ] Westland Helicopters v. Korean Air ]

Nile Dutch Africa Line B.V, Rotterdam, the Netherlands ("NDAL") v. (1) Delta Lloyd Schadeverzekering N.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands ("Delta Lloyd"), (2) Premium Tobacco Investments N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands ("Tobacco"), (3) M. Meerapfel Söhne A.G., Basel, Switzerland ("Meerapfel") and (4) CETAC, Douala, Cameroon ("Cetac") - The "NDS Provider"
Dutch Supreme Court: J.B. Fleers, E.J. Numann, A. Hammerstein, F.B. Bakers, W.D.H. Asser; Advocate General; NJ 2008, 505; SES 2008, 46; 1 February 2008
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA UNDER BILL OF LADING: HAGUE VISBY RULES: LIABILITY FOR DEFECTIVE CONTAINERS SUPPLIED BY CARRIER: PACKAGING OR PART OF THE VESSEL? INTERPRETATION OF TREATIES UNDER DUTCH LAW

Carewins Development (China) Ltd v Bright Fortune Shipping Ltd
Hong Kong SAR Court of Final Appeal: Bokhary, Chan and Ribeiro PJJ, Litton and Gault NPJJ: FACV No. 13 and 14 of 2008: 12 May 2009 [2009 3 HKLRD 409]
STRAIGHT BILLS OF LADING: MISDELIVERY OF GOODS: PRESENTATION RULE: CONVERSION: EXEMPTION OF CARRIERS’ LIABILITY FOR MISDELIVERY: MEANING OF "MISDELIVERY": AMBIGUITY

Bunge SA v ADM Do Brasilia Ltda and 7 Others (The "Darya Radhe")
English Commercial Court: Tomlinson J: [2009] EWHC 845 (Comm): 24 April 2009
Available on BAILII @ http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2009/845.html
BILLS OF LADING: CONTRACTS OF CARRIAGE: LIABILITY OF SHIPPERS: FACTUAL CAUSATION: DANGEROUS GOODS: WHETHER RATS ARE DANGEROUS GOODS: HAGUE RULES, ARTICLE IV, RULE 6: COMMON LAW IMPLIED TERM AS TO SHIPPING OF DANGEROUS GOODS

(1) Serena Navigation Ltd (2) The London Steamship Owners Mutual Insurance Association Ltd -v- (1) Dera Commercial Establishment and (2) Standard Chartered PLC, (The Limnos): 
English High Court, Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court: Burton J.: [2008] EWHC 1036: 15 May 2008
SHIPPING: CARRIAGE OF GOODS: HAGUE-VISBY RULES, ART. IV RULE 5(A): LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: PHYSICAL DAMAGE AND ECONOMIC LOSS: WHETHER CARRIER’S LIABILITY LIMITED BY REFERENCE TO WEIGHT OF PHYSICALLY DAMAGED GOODS OR BY REFERENCE TO WEIGHT OF ENTIRE CARGO

Federal Republic of Germany: Berlin Landgericht: Judgment 4 July 2007: 97 O 6/07
CMR: CARRIAGE OF TEMPERATURE-SENSITIVE GOODS: WHETHER CONSIGNOR INSTRUCTED CARRIER REGARDING REQUIRED TEMPERATURE RANGE: GOODS SUBJECTED TO OUT-OF-RANGE TEMPERATURES DURING TRANSIT: GOODS STOLEN FROM UNGUARDED PARK: WHETHER LOSS OF GOODS CAUSED BY EXPOSURE TO OUT-OF-RANGE TEMPERATURES OR BY THE THEFT

Federal Republic of Germany: Supreme Court, Bundesgerichtshof: I ZR 138/04: 18 October 2007
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: MULTIMODAL CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: DAMAGE DURING LOADING ONTO ON-CARRYING VEHICLE AT PORT OF DISCHARGE: WHETHER MARITIME OR ROAD CARRIAGE LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY APPLY

Carewins Development (China) Ltd v Bright Fortune Shipping Ltd
Hong Kong SAR Court of Appeal: Ma CJHC, Barma and Reyes JJ: CACV 328/9/2006: 13 July 2007
STRAIGHT BILLS OF LADING: MISDELIVERY OF GOODS: PRESENTATION RULE: CONVERSION: EXEMPTION OF CARRIERS’ LIABILITY FOR MISDELIVERY: MEANING OF "DISCHARGE" AND "DELIVERY": AMBIGUITY

In re M/V DG HARMONY
United States of America: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 4483; Sack, Parkes and Hall JJ.: March 3, 2008 
SHIPPING: CARRIAGE OF DANGEROUS CARGO: US CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1936 s.4(6): STRICT LIABILITY: DUTY TO WARN: NEGLIGENCE

New Zealand China Clays Ltd. v. Tasman Orient Line CV
New Zealand High Court: Williams J.: 31 August 2007
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: SHIP DAMAGED BY GROUNDING: SEAWATER ENTRY TO FORWARD COMPARTMENTS: DECK CARGO OF CONTAINERS DAMAGED BY INUNDATION: HAGUE-VISBY RULES: ART.IV RULE 2(a): DEFENCE OF ACT, NEGLECT OR DEFAULT OF THE MASTER… IN THE NAVIGATION OR MANAGEMENT OF THE SHIP: FAILURE TO NOTIFY AUTHORITIES OF CASUALTY: FAILURE TO PROVIDE TIMELY AND ACCURATE INFORMATION TO SHIP’S MANAGERS: CAUSE OF CASUALTY INITIALLY FABRICATED: ALL LEADING TO DELAY IN PROVISION OF SALVAGE SERVICES: WHETHER ELEMENT OF GOOD FAITH ESSENTIAL TO CARRIER’S ENTITLEMENT TO RULE 2(a) DEFENCE: WHETHER ACTIONS OF MASTER AFTER THE CASUALTY WERE ERRORS IN NAVIGATION OR MANAGEMENT OF THE SHIP MADE IN GOOD FAITH (BONA FIDE)

Datec Electronic Holdings Ltd and Another v United Parcels Services Ltd
United Kingdom House of Lords: Lords Hoffmann, Hope, Walker, Mance and Neuberger.: [2007] UKHL 23: 16 May 2007
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: CARRIER’S TERMS EXCLUDE CARRIAGE OF CONSIGNMENTS ABOVE A CERTAIN VALUE: CARRIER’S LIABILITY WHERE SUCH CONSIGNMENT IN FACT CARRIED AND NOT DELIVERED: CMR CONVENTION: WHETHER CONTRACT EXISTS TO WHICH CMR APPLIES: WHETHER CARRIER ENTITLED TO LIMIT LIABILITY UNDER CMR: WHETHER LOSS DUE TO CARRIER’S ‘WILFUL MISCONDUCT’ RENDERING LIMIT OF LIABILITY INAPPLICABLE: APPROACH OF APPELLATE COURTS IN CASES WHERE NO DIRECT EVIDENCE ON THE CAUSE OF THE LOSS

The "Pacific Vigorous"
Singapore High Court: Belinda Ang Saw Ean J: 9 June 2006; [2006] 3 SLR 374; [2006] SGHC 103
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: DELIVERY WITHOUT BILLS OF LADING: UNILATERAL PART PAYMENT BY BUYER: WHETHER SELLER’S ACCEPTANCE OF PART PAYMENT AMOUNTED TO ELECTION NOT TO SUE SHIPOWNER

TNT Global SpA v Denfleet International Ltd
English Court of Appeal: Waller, Tuckey and Toulson LJJ: [2007] EWCA Civ 405: 2 May 2007
Available on BAILII @ http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/405.html
ROAD HAULAGE: MEANING OF ‘WILFUL MISCONDUCT’: CONVENTION ON THE CONTRACT FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD ("THE CMR"), ARTS.29 & 32

Mediterranean Shipping Company SA v Trafigura Beheer BV (The "MSC Amsterdam")
English Court of Appeal: Tuckey, Longmore and Lloyd LJJ: [2007] EWCA Civ 794: 27 July 2007
Available on BAILII @ http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/794.html
BILL OF LADING: CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: FRAUD: CONVERSION OF GOODS: APPLICATION OF HAGUE RULES ("HR") OR HAGUE-VISBY RULES ("HVR"): HVR, ART.X(a)-(c): CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1971: APPLICATION OF HR OR HVR AFTER DISCHARGE BUT BEFORE GOODS IN RECEIVER’S CUSTODY: HR/HVR, ART.II AND ART.III,R.2: PROPER INTERPRETATION OF THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: AWARD OF DAMAGES AT DATE OF CONVERSION OR DATE OF JUDGMENT: TORTS (INTERFERENCE WITH GOODS) ACT 1977, S.3(2)(b): WHETHER BOTH DAMAGES AT DATE OF JUDGMENT AND INTEREST RECOVERABLE

T. Comedy (U.K.) Limited v. E M T Limited
English High Court: Queen’s Bench Division: Commercial Court: Jonathan Hirst QC sitting as a Deputy Judge: 28 March 2007
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: CMR CONVENTION: ROAD HAULAGE ASSOCIATION CONDITIONS OF CARRIAGE AND OF STORAGE: INCORPORATION OF RHA CONDITIONS IN CARRIAGE CONTRACT: LIEN PROVISIONS: GENERAL AND PARTICULAR LIENS: OWNERSHIP OF THE GOODS LIENED: WHETHER GENERAL LIEN COMPATIBLE WITH ART.13.2 OF CMR: WHETHER ART.13.2 LIEN OPERATES WHERE CARRIAGE CHARGES NOT SHOWN ON CONSIGNMENT NOTE

Starlight Exports Limited and Star Light Electronics Company Limited v. CTO (HK) Limited
Hong Kong High Court, Court of First Instance, Commercial Action No. 255 of 2004. Reyes J. 19 July 2006
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: SALE ON FOB TERMS: BILL OF LADING MARKED "TO ORDER OF SHIPPER": CARRIER INSTRUCTED NOT TO RELEASE GOODS SAVE ON PRODUCTION OF FULL SET OF BILLS OF LADING: CARGO RELEASED CONTRARY TO INSTRUCTIONS: LIABILITY OF CARRIER: 9 MONTHS TIME LIMIT UNDER BILL OF LADING: MEANING OF "DELIVERY"

Cargo interests on board MV "Cita" v. Time-charterers of MV "Cita"
Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH); 26 October 2006 – I ZR 20/04
(see also DMC Case Note DMC/04//10 for the lower instance decision of the Hanseatic Court of Appeal of Hamburg)
Sinking of vessel because watch keeper asleep and watch alarm switched off: exclusion of liability for error in navigation –- s.607.2.1 German Commercial Code (Handelsgesetzbuch - HGB)

Asoma Corp. v. SK Shipping Co., Ltd.
United States of America: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26427: 24 October 2006
Charterparty: Bills of Lading: damage to Cargo: claim by assignee of charterer: Conflicting Forum Selection Clauses: whether charterparty or bill of lading governs

Sompo Japan Insurance Company of America, v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Unites States of America; United States Court of Appeals For The Second Circuit; Wesley and Hall, Circuit Judges, and Trager, District Judge; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 17385; July 10 2006
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: SHIPMENT UNDER INTERMODAL-THROUGH BILL OF LADING: APPLICATION OF US CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1935: HIMALAYA CLAUSE: CARMACK AMENDMENT: WHETHER STATUTORY PROVISION OVERRIDES CONTRACTUAL TERMS

Carewins Development (China) Ltd v Bright Fortune Shipping Ltd
Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Stone J: HCCL 49/2004 & HCCL 50/2004: 27 July 2006
STRAIGHT BILLS OF LADING: MISDELIVERY OF GOODS: PRESENTATION RULE: EXEMPTION OF CARRIERS’ LIABILITY FOR MISDELIVERY: MEANING OF "DISCHARGE": HAGUE/HAGUE-VISBY RULES, ART.I(E), ART.II AND ART.III, RULE 8

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance plc and another v MK Digital FZE (Cyprus) Ltd and others
English Court of Appeal: Auld, Rix 
and Maurice Kay LJJ: [2006] EWCA Civ 629: 17 May 2006
ROAD TRANSPORT: FREIGHT FORWARDER ("COMMISSIONNAIRE DE TRANSPORT"): THEFT OF GOODS IN TRANSIT: PROPER JURISDICTION OF DISPUTE: ACTION "PENDING": COURT "FIRST SEIZED": DOMICILE: PLACE OF PERFORMANCE: CMR CONVENTION, ART.31: CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD ACT 1965: EC JURISDICTION REGULATION 44/2001, ART.30: BRUSSELS CONVENTION, ARTS.2 AND 5: CIVIL JURISDICTIONS AND JUDGMENTS ACT 1982, S.42

Parsons Corporation and Six Others v. Scheepvartonderneming Happy Ranger (the "Happy Ranger")
English High Court, Commercial Division: Gloster J.: [2006] EWHC 122 (Comm): 9 February 2006
SHIPPING: CARGO DAMAGE: FAILURE OF CRANE HOOK: HAGUE-VISBY RULES: WHETHER SHIPOWNER HAD EXERCISED DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE THE SHIP SEAWORTHY UNDER ARTICLE III RULE 1: WHETHER DUTY TO EXERCISE DUE DILIGENCE ATTACHES BEFORE DELIVERY OF SHIP TO SHIPOWNER: WHETHER LOADING CARRIED OUT PROPERLY AND CAREFULLY UNDER ARTICLE III RULE 2: ROLE OF CLASSIFICATION SOCIETY

Fujitsu Computer Products Corp v Bax Global Inc
English Commercial Court: Christopher Clarke J.: [2005] EWHC 2289 (Comm): 09 November 2005
CARGO STOLEN FROM AIR CARRIER: HOUSE AIR WAYBILL (HAWB): WHETHER CARRIER CAN LIMIT LIABILITY: WARSAW CONVENTION (AS AMENDED BY THE HAGUE PROTOCOL 1955): CARRIAGE BY AIR ACT 1961, SCHEDULE 1: WHETHER HAWB CONTAINED NOTICE REQUIRED BY ART.8(c)

Rosewood Trucking Ltd v Brian Balaam
English Court of Appeal (Civ Div): Tuckey, Neuberger LJJ.: 4 November 2005
CARRIAGE BY ROAD: CONVENTION ON THE CONTRACT FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD – "CMR": SUCCESSIVE CARRIERS: INDEMNITY PAID TO FIRST CARRIER BY INTERMEDIATE CONTRACTING CARRIER UNDER SUB-CONTRACT: WHETHER INTERMEDIATE CARRIER ENTITLED TO RECOVER FROM CARRIER RESPONSIBLE FOR LOSS: WHETHER PAYMENT MADE "IN COMPLIANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF" CMR CONVENTION ART.37

Datec Electronic Holdings Ltd and Another v United Parcels Services Ltd
English Court of Appeal: Brooke LJ (V-P), Sedley and Richards LJJ.: 29 November 2005
CONTRACT FOR THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: CARRIER’S TERMS EXCLUDE CARRIAGE OF CONSIGNMENTS ABOVE A CERTAIN VALUE: CARRIER’S LIABILITY WHERE SUCH CONSIGNMENT IN FACT CARRIED AND NOT DELIVERED: CMR CONVENTION: WHETHER CONTRACT EXISTS TO WHICH CMR APPLIES: WHETHER CARRIER ENTITLED TO LIMIT LIABILITY UNDER CMR: WHETHER LOSS DUE TO CARRIER’S "WILFUL MISCONDUCT" RENDERING LIMIT OF LIABILITY INAPPLICABLE

Ericsson Limited and Ericsson Mobile Communications AB v. (1) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (2) KLM Cargo (3) ASG Air & Sea AB (4) APC Asia Pacific Cargo (H.K.) Ltd (5) Hong Kong Air Cargo Terminals Ltd (6) Jardine Airport Services Ltd v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and KLM Cargo (Third Parties)
Hong Kong: High Court: Court of First Instance, Commercial Action Nos. 202 of 1999 and 2 of 2000: Stone J
CARRIAGE BY AIR : THE AMENDED WARSAW CONVENTION AND GUADALAJARA CONVENTION: THEFTS OF CONSIGNMENTS DURING CARRIAGE: LIMITATION OF LIABILITY OF THE ACTUAL CARRIER AND CONTRACTUAL CARRIER AND THEIR SERVANTS OR AGENTS: BREAKING THE LIMIT: WHETHER CLAIM AROSE FROM ACT DONE "WITH INTENT TO CAUSE DAMAGE": QUANTUM

Primetrade AG v Ythan Limited (The "Ythan")
English Commercial Court: Justice Aikens: [2005] EWHC 2399 (Comm): 1 November 2005
SHIPOWNERS CLAIM AGAINST BILLS OF LADING HOLDER FOLLOWING LOSS OF VESSEL: CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1992, SECTIONS 2(1), 2(2), 3(1), 5(2) AND 5(4): MEANING OF "HOLDER", "TRANSACTION" AND "MAKING A CLAIM": LONDON ARBITRATION CLAUSE INCORPORATED INTO BILLS OF LADING: ARBITRATION ACT 1996, SECTIONS 67 AND 73: MEANING OF "ANY OBJECTION" AND "THAT OBJECTION": RIGHT TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF EXISTING OR NEW OBJECTION ON APPEAL

UCO Bank v Golden Shore Transportation Pte Ltd [2005] SGCA 42
Singapore Court of Appeal: Chao Hick Tin JA, Judith Prakash J.: 14 September 2005
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA –TITLE TO SUE UNDER BILLS OF LADING – MEANING OF HOLDER AND "GOOD FAITH" UNDER SINGAPORE BILLS OF LADING ACT 1994– WHETHER CONSIGNEE A HOLDER WITHOUT ENDORSEMENT IN ITS FAVOUR

VASTFAME CAMERA LIMITED v. (1) BIRKART GLOBISTICS LIMITED (formerly BIRKART-EAST WEST FREIGHT LIMITED) (2) MOIROUD S.A. (3) ARIES WORLD MARITIME S.A. (4) H.P.I. FRANCE and MOIROUD S.A. (Third Party)
Hong Kong: High Court of the Hong Kong, Court of First Instance: Stone J.: Commercial Action No.63 of 2002: 5 October 2005
SHIPPING: SALE ON FOB TERMS: "ORDER" BILL OF LADING ISSUED BY FREIGHT FORWARDER: RELEASE OF GOODS BY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF B/L: CLAIM BY SELLER UNDER B/L: WHETHER FREIGHT FORWARDER ACTING AS PRINCIPAL/CONTRACTUAL CARRIER OR AS AGENT: WHETHER ENTITLED TO RELY ON EXCLUSION/LIMITATION CLAUSES IN B/L: RIGHT OF INDEMNITY FROM THIRD PARTY

In re M/V DG Harmony and Consolidated Cases
United States: Federal Court for the Southern District of New York: Chin DJ.: No. 98 Civ. 8394 (DC), 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23874: 18 October 2005
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: CALCIUM HYPOCHLORITE IN CONTAINERS: EXPLOSION AND FIRE: LOSS OF SHIP AND CARGO: SHIPPER’S LIABILITY UNDER US COGSA: STRICT LIABILITY: PRIVITY OF CONTRACT: LIABILITY IN NEGLIGENCE: LIABILITY FOR FAILURE TO WARN

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Plc and Exel Logistique SA v (1)MK Digital SZE (Cyprus) Ltd, (2) Hi-Tec Electronics A/S and Others
English Commercial Court: Aikens J.: [2005] EWHC 1408 (Comm): 21 June 2005
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: WHETHER CONVENTION ON THE CONTRACT FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD ("CMR") APPLIED: WHETHER CARRIER A "COMMISSIONAIRE DE TRANSPORT" UNDER FRENCH LAW: European Jurisdiction Regulation 44/2001: BRUSSELS CONVENTION 1968: WHICH COURT FIRST "SEISED" OF THE ACTION: APPROPRIATE FORUM

Sea Success Maritime Inc v. African Maritime Carriers Limited
English Commercial Court: Aikens, J.: [2005] EWHC 1542 (Comm): 15 July 2005
TIMECHARTERPARTY: C/P CLAUSE PROVIDING "MASTER HAS THE RIGHT AND MUST REJECT ANY CARGO THAT ARE SUBJECT TO CLAUSING OF THE Bs/L: MEANING OF "CLAUSING": WHETHER IT HAS AN ORDINARY SETTLED MEANING OR SETTLED COMMERCIAL USAGE: COMMERCIAL CONTEXT: CARRIAGE OF STEEL: APPARENT ORDER AND CONDITION OF GOODS: RELATIONSHIP TO THE DESCRIPTION OF GOODS: APPARENT "GOOD" ORDER: APPARENT "PROPER" ORDER: WHEN IS CARGO SUBJECT TO CLAUSING: WHETHER ON FIRST DRAFT OF B/L OR WHEN DESCRIPTION OF CARGO ULTIMATELY PROPOSED BY CARGO INTERESTS

Transport insurer of X. v. freight forwarder Y – M/V "Atlantic Concert"
Federal Republic of Germany: Regional Appeal Court Hamburg (Oberlandesgericht Hamburg – OLG): TranspR 2004, 403: 19 August 2004 – 6 U 178/03
Combined transport: law applicable to losses during transhipment: Whether a separate land transport: whether subject to limitation of general german law of affreightment: whether bill of lading limitation clause in valid form

Datec Electronic Holdings Ltd & Incoparts BV v. United Parcels Service Ltd & Anor
English High Court: Commercial Division: Andrew Smith J.: [2005] EWHC 221 (Comm): 22 February 2005
CONTRACT FOR CARRIAGE OF GOODS: INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE BY ROAD: CMR CONVENTION: CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD ACT 1965: CARRIER’S LIABILITY: WHETHER CARRIER’S LIABILITY UNLIMITED BY REASON OF WILFUL MISCONDUCT OF CARRIER’S EMPLOYEES: STANDARD TERMS LIMITING VALUE OF PACKAGES TO BE OFFERED FOR CARRIAGE: WHETHER CONTRACT EXISTS WHERE PACKAGES EXCEED STATED VALUE: WHETHER EXCESS VALUE WAIVED BY CARRIER: WHETHER EXCULPATORY PROVISIONS RELATING TO EXCESS VALUE PACKAGES VALID UNDER CMR

American Home Assurance Co. v. CSX Lines, Inc.
United States of America: Federal Court for the Southern District of New York: Loretta A. Preska, Judge: 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4326: 18 March 2005
SHIPPING: CONTAINER: MULTIMODAL CARRIAGE: liability FOR LOSS/DAMAGE ON LAND LEG: Service agreement: WHETHER SERVICE AGREEMENT INCORPORATES BILL OF LADING TERMS: CONSTRUCTION: COURSE OF DEALING: BILL OF LADING PROVIDES FOR limitation "PER SHIPPING OR CUSTOMARY FREIGHT UNIT OR PIECE": WHETHER LIMITATION APPLICABLE TO CONTAINER, SKIDS/pALLETS INSIDE CONTAINER OR TO CARTONS ON SKIDS: HIMALAYA CLAUSE: WHETHER INLAND HAULIER ENTITLED TO BILL OF LADING LIMITATION

Asil Gida Ve Kimya Sanayii Ve Ticaret A.S., as Owner of the m.v. "Mustafa Nevzat" v. Cosco Qingdao, as Charterers
Arbitration Award: Society of Maritime Arbitrators New York: Louis P Sheinbaum, Chairman, Lucienne Bulow and Alexis Nichols, arbitrators: 2 January 2004

Bhatia Shipping & Agencies PVT. Limited v. Alcobex Metals & Others
English High Court, Commercial Division: Mr Julian Flaux QC: [2004] EWHC 2323 (Comm): 20 October 2004
MULTI-MODAL CARRIAGE CONTRACT: CLAIMS TO BE TIME-BARRED IF PROCEEDINGS NOT INSTITUTED WITHIN NINE MONTHS OF DELIVERY: ALLEGED MISDELIVERY: NO CLAIM BY CARGO INTERESTS BROUGHT WITHIN NINE-MONTH PERIOD: CARRIER CLAIMS FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATORY RELIEF: WHETHER CLAIM TIME-BARRED: WHETHER NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPROPRIATE

J I MacWilliam Co Inc (Boston) v Mediterranean Shipping Co SA (the "Rafaela S")
English House of Lords: Lords Bingham, Nicholls, Steyn, Rodger and Brown: [2005] UKHL 11: 16 February 2005
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: Bills of lading: whether a ‘straight bill’ is a bill of lading or ‘similar document of title’: Hague/Hague-Visby Rules, Article I: application of UK COGSA 1971

Mitsubishi Corporation v Eastwind Transport Ltd and Others
English High Court, Commercial Division: Mr. Ian Glick, QC: [2004] EWHC 2924 (Comm): 15 December 2004
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: BILL OF LADING: EXEMPTION CLAUSE: WHETHER REPUGNANT TO PURPOSE OF CONTRACT: INTERPRETATION: RISK ALLOCATION UNDER COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS: INSURABLE RISKS

(1) A/S D/S SVENBORG (2) D/A/ AF 1912 A/S (Trading in Partnership as MAERSK SEALAND) v (1) FAR EAST TRADING COTE D'IVOIRE (2) FARES NAJI KHALIL (3) DARWICHE FAWZIHASSAN (4) KHALIL ABDUL KARIM (2004)
English High Court, Commercial Division: Nigel Teare QC: [2004] EWHC 2929 (Comm) 15 December 2004
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: BILLS OF LADING: DELIVERY OF CARGO AGAINST FRAUDULENT BILLS OF LADING: DECEIT: BURDEN OF PROOF: DAMAGES

Ferrostaal, Inc. v. M/V Sea Baisen
United States: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York: Richard J. Holwell, District Judge: No. 02 Civ. 1900: 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24083 : November 30, 2004
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT "COGSA": TIME BAR: EXTENSION BY PURPORTED AGENT

Toll (FGCT) Pty Limited v Alphapharm Pty Limited
Australia: High Court of Australia; Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ; [2004] HCA 52; 11 November 2004
Contract: Construction and interpretation: Whether road transport company’s general terms and conditions incorporated into contract: exclusion clause: contract signed but terms and conditions not read: Conclusiveness of act of signature – Principal and AGENT: Whether consignee bound by contract entered into by another : Whether agent authorised to contract on terms including exclusion clause

Jindal Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and Others v. Islamic Solidarity Company Jordan Inc. – the "Jordan II"
English House of Lords: Lords Bingham, Nicholls, Steyn, Hoffmann and Scott: [2004] UKHL 49: 25 November 2004
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: VOYAGE CHARTER ON FREE IN OUT STOWED AND TRIMMED ‘FIOST’ TERMS: BILLS OF LADING SUBJECT TO HAGUE-VISBY RULES: WHETHER FIOST TERMS MAKE CARGO INTERESTS RESPONSIBLE FOR CARGO LOSS/DAMAGE OCCURRING IN THOSE OPERATIONS: CARRIER’S OBLIGATIONS UNDER HAGUE-VISBY RULES ARTICLE III RULE 2: WHETHER IN CONFLICT WITH FIOST PROVISIONS

Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd
United States: New York City Civil Court: Eileen A. Rakower, Judge:
May 2, 2003: 763 N.Y.S.2d 427, 196 Misc. 2d 11 (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 2003)
US CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1936 ("COGSA"): unreasonable deviation: misplaced cargo: lost cargo: NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION

Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. James N. Kirby, Pty. Ltd., No. 02-1028
United States Supreme Court: Opinion by Justice O’Connor: November 9, 2004;(not yet officially reported)
ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION: US Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1936 ("COGSA"): BILLS OF LADING: MULTIMODAL BILLS OF LADING: NVOCC: CONTRACTING CARRIER: ACTUAL CARRIER: ACCIDENT DURING CARRIAGE BY RAIL: HIMALAYA CLAUSE

Netstal-Maschinen AG and Securitas Bremer Allgemeine Versicherung AG v Dons Transporte AG, Stewart Height and David O’Neill
English Mercantile Court, Central London: Hallgarten J.: 26 May 2004
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: DAMAGE OF GOODS: TOTAL LOSS: WILFUL MISCONDUCT: CMR CONVENTION: ARTICLE 17.2 CMR

Pacific Carriers Limited v BNP Paribas
Australia: High Court of Australia: Gleeson CJ, Gunmow, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ.: 5 August 2004 
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: DELIVERY WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF BILLS OF LADING: LETTERS OF INDEMNITY: BANK’S SIGNATURE: WHETHER SIGNING AS VERIFICATOR: WHETHER SIGNING AS INDEMNIFYING PARTY: AUTHORITY: OSTENSIBLE AUTHORITY: REPRESENTATION BY ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE: ESTOPPEL: ABSENCE OF PROCEDURES TO PROTECT AGAINST UNAUTHORISED CONDUCT

El Greco (Australia) Pty Limited & Anor v. Mediterranean Shipping Co. SA
Australia: Federal Court of Australia: Black CJ, Beaumont & Allsop JJ.: 10 August 2004
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: BILL OF LADING: CONTAINER SAID TO CONTAIN NUMBER OF PIECES POSTERS AND PRINTS: ARTICLE IV RULE 5 OF HAGUE-VISBY RULES: ENUMERATION: "AS PACKED IN SUCH ARTICLE OF TRANSPORT": WHETHER ENUMERATION EFFECTIVE WHERE NO MEANS OF PACKING INDICATED AND NUMBER OF PACKAGES NOT GIVEN

Frans Maas (UK) Ltd v Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd
English Commercial Court: Gross J.: 30 June 2004
BAILMENT: THEFT OF GOODS: NEGLIGENCE AND WILFUL DEFAULT OF BAILEE’S EMPLOYEES: APPLICATION OF CONTRACT TERMS: BRITISH INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION STANDARD TERMS: VICARIOUS LIABILITY: LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT 1977: REASONABLENESS

Ferro Union Inc. v. M/V Tamamonta
United States of America: Federal Court for the Southern District of New York: Judge: Victor Marrero: 7 May 2004
Damages: burden of proof: fair market value: market price: insurance recovery: Carriage of Goods by Sea Act ("COGSA")

Schramm, Inc. v. Shipco Transport, Inc
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Judges: Wilkinson, Michael, and Shedd: No. 03-1075: 2004 U.S. App. Lexis 7288: 15 April 2004
rig CARRIED AS CARGO: restowage AT INTERMEDIATE PORT: rig damaged WHILST ON DOCKSIDE: WHETHER US$500 LIMITATION PER UNIT UNDER US CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1936 APPLIED

Dairy Containers Ltd v Tasman Orient Line CV (The "Tasman Discoverer")
The UK Privy Council, on appeal from the Court of Appeal of New Zealand: Lords Bingham, Hoffman, Phillips and Carswell, and Dame Sian Elias: 20 May 2004
CARGO DAMAGED ON SEA VOYAGE: BILL OF LADING: HAGUE RULES CONTRACTUALLY INCORPORATED INTO B/L: ART. IV RULE 5 AND ART.IX  ESTABLISH PACKAGE LIMIT AS VALUE OF £100 STERLING IN GOLD AS AT 1924: B/L PROVIDES FOR  PACKAGE LIMITATION OF £100 STERLING LAWFUL MONEY OF THE UK:  CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT: HAGUE RULES APPLY, AS AMENDED BY LIMITATION CLAUSE IN B/L: PARAMOUNTCY CLAUSES ALSO SUBJECT TO CONTRACTUAL LIMITATION clause

Transport Insurer of X. v. Freight Forwarder Y
German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH): TranspR 2004, 214;: 29 January 2004 – I ZR 162/01
CMR art. 29: international road transport: on the claimant’s burden of proving severe fault on the part of the carrier (here: traffic accident)

Transport insurer of X. v. freight forwarder Y
German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH) TranspR 2004, 77; November 20th, 2003 – I ZR 294/02
CMR art. 31.2: international road transport: declaratory proceedings as "pending action" pursuant to art. 31 CMR

Sunlight Mercantile Pte Ltd v Ever Lucky Shipping Co Ltd: [2004] 1 SLR 171
Singapore Court of Appeal: Yong Pung How CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA and Tan Lee Meng J
YORK ANTWERP RULES 1974: WHETHER UNSEAWORTHINESS OF VESSEL AFFECTED RIGHT TO GENERAL AVERAGE CONTRIBUTION: WHETHER EXEMPTION CLAUSES IN BILLS OF LADING EXCLUDING LIABILITY FOR DECK CARGO ABSOLVED SHIPOWNERS FROM ACTIONABLE FAULT

Siemens Ltd v. Schenker International (Australia) Pty Ltd & Another
High Court of Australia: McHugh ACJ., Gummow, Kirby, Callinan and Heydon JJ: 9 March 2004: [2004] HCA 11
AVIATION: CARRIAGE BY AIR: DAMAGE TO CARGO BETWEEN AIRPORT OF DESTINATION AND BONDED WAREHOUSE: WARSAW CONVENTION, ARTICLES 18 AND 22: MEANING OF ‘IN AN AERODROME’: DEFINITION OF AIRPORT SITE: CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE AIR WAYBILL: WHETHER LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CLAUSE APPLIES TO TRANSPORTATION AFTER AIR CARRIAGE COMPLETE

Cargo interests on board MV "Cita" v. Time-charterers of MV "Cita"
Higher Regional Court (Hanseatisches Oberlandesgericht – OLG) Hamburg; 18 December 2003 – 6 U 220/00
Sinking of vessel because watch keeper asleep and watch alarm switched off - exclusion of liability for error in navigation –- s.607.2.1 German Commercial Code (HGB)

Euro Cellular (Distribution) plc v Danzas Limited t/a Danzas AEI Intercontinental and Another
English Commercial Court: Nigel Teare QC: 19 December 2003
CONTRACT: FREIGHT FORWARDING AND WAREHOUSE SERVICES: CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS: LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENT RELEASE: EXCEPTION CLAUSES: BURDEN OF PROOF

Dessert Service, Inc. v. M/V MSC Jamie/Rafaela
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York; Naomi Reice Buchwald; 219 F. Supp. 2d. 504; August 8, 2002
CARRIAGE BY SEA: MEASURE OF LOSS: MARKET VALUE: REPLACEMENT VALUE: SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: PRE-JUDGMENT INTEREST: APPROPRIATE RATE

Indemnity Insurance Company of North America v. Hanjin Shipping Company
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood: 348 F.3d 628: October 31 2003
SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT: COMMON CARRIERS: CLAUSE PARAMOUNT: BAILMENTS: CUSTOMS: HAGUE RULES: DELIVERY: VALID DELIVERY: INTERMODAL BILLS OF LADING

Transport Insurer of M. GmbH v. D. Railroad AG
German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof – BGH): Ullmann, v. Ungern-Sternberg, Bornkamm, Pokrant, Schaffert; TranspR 2003, 453: June 26th, 2003 – I ZR 206/00
CIM Art. 40. 3: CMR Art. 23.4: international railroad and road transport: theft of untaxed cigarettes: tax as recoverable loss

Weintraub & Sons, Inc. v. E.T.A. Transportation, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York: 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14851 (not yet officially reported): 28 August 2003
Shipping: Carriage of goods by sea act: Freight Forwarder: Common Carrier: Agent: Bills of Lading: Whether Defendant was a Freight Forwarder or Common Carrier

BNP Paribas v Bandung Shipping Pte Ltd; The "Victoria Cob"
Singapore High Court: Belinda Ang J: 12 May 2003
DELIVERY OF CARGO WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF BILL OF LADING: BANK’S TITLE TO SUE IN CONTRACT AND FOR CONVERSION: USE OF SWITCHED BILLS OF LADING: BANK BECOMING HOLDER OF BILLS OF LADING AFTER DELIVERY OF CARGO: WHETHER BILLS OF LADING SPENT OR EXHAUSTED: WHETHER CARGO WAS PLEDGED TO BANK: WHETHER BANK AUTHORISED DELIVERY WITHOUT BILLS OF LADING

Glencore International AG v. Owners of the "Cherry", the "Epic" and the "Addax"
Singapore Court of Appeal: Yong Pung How CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA, Judith Prakash J: 12 November 2002: [2003] 1 SLR 471
NON-DISCHARGE OF OIL AT DESTINATION: LIABILITY UNDER BILL OF LADING AND FOR conversion: WHETHER CLAIMANT HAD TITLE TO SUE FOR CONVERSION: WHETHER SHIPOWNERS ENTITLED TO FOLLOW TIME CHARTERERS’ INSTRUCTIONS: WHETHER NON-DISCHARGE WAS EFFECTIVE CAUSE OF CLAIMANT’S LOSS

GKN Westland Helicopters Limited and another v Korean Air and another
English Commercial Court: Morison J.: 19 May 2003
CARRIAGE BY AIR: DAMAGE TO CARGO: WARSAW CONVENTION: LIMITATION: CLAIMANT’S RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS: ART. 22(4): PAYMENT IN: MEANING OF "DAMAGES"

Jarl Trä AB and others v Convoys Limited
English High Court: Moore-Bick, J.; 25 June 2003
CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: RIGHT TO SUB-CONTRACT "ON ANY TERMS": SUB-BAILMENT: SUB-CONTRACTORS’ GENERAL LIEN CLAUSE: WHETHER GENERAL LIEN ENFORCEABLE AGAINST CARGO OWNERS: WHETHER GENERAL LIEN CLAUSE UNREASONABLE OR UNUSUAL: EXTENT OF GENERAL LIEN

Ever Lucky Shipping Co Ltd v Sunlight Mercantile Pte Ltd and Liberty Citystate Insurance Pte Ltd; The "Pep Nautic" [2003] SGHC 80
Singapore High Court: Judith Prakash J: 15 April 2003
RIGHT OF SHIPOWNERS TO GENERAL AVERAGE CONTRIBUTION UNDER YORK ANTWERP RULES 1974: WHETHER ACTIONABLE FAULT ON THE PART OF SHIPOWNERS AFFECTING RIGHT TO CONTRIBUTION: WHETHER SHIPOWNERS FAILED TO EXERCISE DUE DILIGENCE UNDER HAGUE RULES TO MAKE SHIP SEAWORTHY: WHETHER EXEMPTION CLAUSES IN BILLS OF LADING EXCLUDING LIABILITY FOR DECK CARGO ABSOLVE SHIPOWNERS FROM ACTIONABLE FAULT

China Airlines Ltd v Phillips Hong Kong Ltd
Singapore Court of Appeal: Chao JA, Yong JA, Tan JA: 25 June 2002
CARRIAGE BY AIR: LOSS OF FOUR CARTONS/SUB-PACKAGES CONTAINED WITHIN A PALLET: COMPUTATION OF CARRIER’S LIMIT OF LIABILITY UNDER WARSAW CONVENTION AS AMENDED BY HAGUE PROTOCOL

Steel Coils, Inc. v. M/v. Lake Marion
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit: Circuit Judge Patrick E. Higginbotton: 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 9193 (not yet officially reported): May 13, 2003
US Carriage of goods by sea act (1936) ("COGSA"): Burden of Proof: Due Diligence: Non-delegable Duties: Perils of the Sea:Latent Defect: Per Package Limitation: Carrier: Whether a Party Can Contractually Delegate a Duty and Still Remain Liable for Failure to Exercise Due Diligence: Whether a Non-carrier Can Be Liable in Tort Outside of COGSA

A/S D/S Svendborg and D/S af 1912 A/S (Trading as Maersk Sealand) v Ali Hussein Akar and others
English Commercial Court: Deputy High Court Judge Julian Flaux QC: 15 April 2003: [2003] EWHC 797 (Comm)
BILL OF LADING: BREACH OF CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: EXCLUSIVE ENGLISH LAW AND JURISDICTION CLAUSE: DAMAGES FOR COST OF DEFENDING CLAIMS IN FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS: FRAUDULENT CLAIM:TORT OF DECEIT

Trafigura Beheer BV v. Golden Stavraetos Maritime Inc.
English Court of Appeal: Sir Andrew Morritt, Vice-Chancellor, Clarke and Kay LJJ.: 15 May 2003: [2003] EWCA Civ 664
VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: ARTICLE III RULE 6 HAGUE-VISBY RULES: NON-DELIVERY OF CARGO AT DESTINATION: CLAIM FOR CONTAMINATION: CARGO ON-CARRIED TO NEW DESTINATION FOR DISCHARGE THERE: LIMITATION PERIODS: WHETHER LIMITATION PERIOD STARTED ON NON-DELIVERY AT ORIGINAL DESTINATION OR ON COMPLETION OF DISCHARGE AT ALTERNATIVE DESTINATION

J I MacWilliam Co Inc (Boston) v Mediterranean Shipping Co SA (the "Rafaela S")
English Court of Appeal: Peter Gibson and Rix LJJ, Jacob J. [2003] EWCA Civ. 556: 16 April 2003
Bills of lading: package limitation: US COGSA 1936: whether a ‘straight bill’ is a bill of lading or ‘similar document of title’: Hague/Hague-Visby Rules, Article I: application of UK COGSA 1971: transshipment: whether one contract of carriage or TWo

Granville Oil and Chemicals Ltd v. Davies Turner & Co. Ltd
English Court of Appeal: Potter and Tuckey LJJ and Hart J: 15 April 2003
COMMERCIAL CONTRACT: BRITISH INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION (BIFA) STANDARD TRADING CONDITIONS: NINE-MONTH TIME BAR: REASONABLENESS: UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT 1977: DAMAGE TO GOODS: ALL RISKS IN TRANSIT INSURANCE: FAILURE TO INSURE: BREACH OF CONTRACT: EQUAL BARGAINING STRENGTH: BUSINESS PRACTICE: WHETHER TIME LIMIT PRACTICABLE

Daewoo Heavy Industries and Another v. Klipriver Shipping Ltd & Navigation Maritime Bulgares ("Kapetan Petko Voiveda")
English Court of Appeal: Lords Justices Aldous, Judge and Longmore: [2003] EWCA Civ. 451: 3 April 2003
Bills of lading: breach of contract of carriage: cargo stowed on deck without authority: Hague Rules 1924, limitation of liability: application of Article IV rule 5: meaning of ‘in any event’: analogy with ‘deviation cases’

Sandeman Coprimar SA v Transitos y Transportes Integrales SL and Others
English Court of Appeal: Lord Phillips MR, Rix and Scott Baker LJJ: 11 February 2003
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY ROAD: TAX SEALS: CMR CONVENTION: SUCCESSIVE CARRIAGE UNDER SINGLE CONTRACT: CARRIAGE UNDER SERIES OF SEPARATE CONTRACTS: GOODS LOST IN CUSTODY OF SUB-BAILEE: BAILOR BOUND BY TERMS OF BAILMENT FROM BAILEE TO SUB-BAILEE: CMR ARTICLE 36: CAN INTERMEDIATE BAILEE BE SUED: LOSSES ARISING UNDER GUARANTEE TO EXCISE AUTHORITIES: ARTICLE 23: WHETHER LOSSES CAN BE REGARDED AS PART OF VALUE OF GOODS OR AS "OTHER CHARGES"

Asil Gida Ve Kimya Sanayii Ve Ticaret A.S., as Owner of the m.v. "Mustafa Nevzat" v. Cosco Qingdao, as Charterers
Arbitration Award: Society of Maritime Arbitrators, New York: Louis P Sheinbaum, Chairman, Lucienne Bulow and Alexis Nichols, arbitrators: 21 August 2002
DAMAGE TO CARGO: LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AT DISCHARGE PORT: OWNERS HELD RESPONSIBLE: OWNERS SEEK INDEMNITY FROM TIME CHARTERERS: WHETHER DOCTRINE OF ISSUE PRECLUSION (ISSUE ALREADY DETERMINED IN ANOTHER TRIBUNAL) RENDERED CLAIM INADMISSIBLE: PRE-REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION OF DOCTRINE: WHETHER SATISFIED IN THIS CASE

THE "STARSIN"
English House of Lords: Lords Bingham, Steyn, Hoffmann, Hobhouse and Millett: 14 March 2003: [2003] UKHL 12
Bills of lading: Owners’ or Charterers’ bills: Himalaya clause: application of Hague Rules to Himalaya clause exemptions: CLAIMS IN TORT: TITLE TO SUE

P&O Nedlloyd BV v. Utaniko Ltd; DKBS 1912 and AKTS Svenborg (trading as Maersk Line) v. East West Corporation
English Court of Appeal: Mance, Brooke and Laws LJJ.: 12 February 2003
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: DELIVERY IN CHILE: NEGOTIABLE BILLS OF LADING: MISDELIVERY FROM CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE: RESPONSIBILITY OF CARRIERS FOR MISDELIVERY: CARGO INTERESTS’ TITLE TO SUE UNDER CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1992: CONSIGNEES AS AGENTS FOR SHIPPERS: SHIPPERS AS UNDISCLOSED PRINCIPALS OF CONSIGNEES: CLAIMS IN BAILMENT: CLAIMANTS’ RIGHTS TO SUE AS BAILORS SURVIVE STATUTORY TRANSFER OF CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS: CLAIMANTS’ RIGHTS TO SUE FOR DAMAGE TO THEIR REVERSIONARY INTEREST: CARRIERS’ OBLIGATION AS BAILEES: CARRIERS’ OBLIGATION IN NEGLIGENCE: STATUS OF CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE IN CHILE: FAILURE TO INSTRUCT WAREHOUSE OPERATORS/CONTAINER OPERATORS TO DELIVER ONLY AGAINST SIGHT OF ORIGINAL Bs/LADING: EXCULPATORY CLAUSES IN Bs/LADING: NOT APPLICABLE WHERE BILLS PROVIDED FOR COMBINED TRANSPORT: NOT APPLICABLE TO DELIVERY WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF ORIGINAL BILLS OF LADING

Jindal Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., TCI Trans Commodities AG and Hiansa SA v. Islamic Solidarity Co. Jordan Inc. – the "Jordan II"
English Court of Appeal: Tuckey and Waller LJJ. , Mrs. Justice Black: 13 February 2003: [2003] EWCA Civ 144
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY ON FREE IN OUT STOWED AND TRIMMED ‘FIOST’ TERMS: BILLS OF LADING INCORPORATE ALL TERMS OF THE C/P: Bs/L SUBJECT TO HAGUE-VISBY RULES: WHETHER FIOST TERMS MAKE CARGO INTERESTS RESPONSIBLE FOR CARGO LOSS/DAMAGE OCCURRING IN THOSE OPERATIONS: CARRIER’S OBLIGATIONS UNDER HAGUE-VISBY RULES ARTICLE III RULE 2: WHETHER IN CONFLICT WITH FIOST PROVISIONS

Press Automation Technology Pte Ltd v. Trans-Link Exhibition Forwarding Pte Ltd
Singapore High Court: Judith Prakash J.: 3 December 2002
Freight forwarding contract: goods damaged in freight forwarders’ custody: incorporation of Singapore Freight Forwarding Association conditions: whether clauses for 9 month time bar and limitation of liability were incorporated into the contract: if so, whether these clauses were reasonable under the Unfair Contract Terms Act (cap 396)

East West Corporation v DKBS 1912 and AKTS Svenborg: Utaniko Ltd v P&O Nedlloyd BV
English Commercial Court: Thomas J.: 27 February 2002
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: DELIVERY IN CHILE: NEGOTIABLE BILLS OF LADING: MISDELIVERY FROM CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE: RESPONSIBILITY OF CARRIERS FOR MISDELIVERY: CARGO INTERESTS’ TITLE TO SUE UNDER CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1992: CONSIGNEES AS AGENTS FOR SHIPPERS: SHIPPERS AS UNDISCLOSED PRINCIPALS OF CONSIGNEES: RIGHT TO POSSESS: STATUS OF Bs/L IN CASES OF MISDELIVERY: CARRIERS’ OBLIGATION AS BAILEES: CARRIERS’ OBLIGATION IN NEGLIGENCE: STATUS OF CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE IN CHILE: HAMBURG RULES: "HANDED OVER": Bs/LADING CLAUSES: IMPLIED TERMS: PORT-TO-PORT PROVISIONS: EXCULPATORY CLAUSES NOT APPLICABLE TO MISDELIVERY: NEGLIGENCE: FAILURE TO INSTRUCT WAREHOUSE OPERATORS/CONTAINER OPERATORS TO DELIVER ONLY AGAINST SIGHT OF ORIGINAL B/L

Alena Ltd. v. Harlequin Transport Services Ltd
Commercial Court: Morison J.: 20 November 2002
ROAD HAULAGE: CMR CONDITIONS: ALLEGED BRAKE FAILURE: LOSS: LIABILITY: AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION: LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: WHETHER ACCIDENT CAUSED BY WILFUL MISCONDUCT OF CARRIER UNDER ART.29 CMR

Hirdaramani Industries Limited and another v. Orient Consolidation Services (HK) Limited
Hong Kong High Court: Stone J.: 18th July 2000
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: FORWARDER’S CERTIFICATE OF RECEIPT: OCEAN CARRIER’S BILL OF LADING: DISCREPANCIES: BUYER OBTAINS POSSESSION OF GOODS UNDER BILL OF LADING WITHOUT PAYMENT: RESPONSIBILITY OF FORWARDER/CONSOLIDATOR: IN CONTRACT: BAILMENT: CONTROL OF GOODS: CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION

The Owners of Cargo on board the ship "Brij" v. The Owners of the ship "Brij"
Hong Kong Admiralty Court: Waung J.: 14 July 2000
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: NVOC BILLS OF LADING: OCEAN CARRIER BILLS OF LADING: NEGOTIABLE Bs/L AND STRAIGHT Bs/L: SHIPPER HOLDS NVOC Bs/L BUT NOT OCEAN CARRIER B/L: DELIVERY BY CUSTOMS AT DISCHARGE PORT TO NAMED CONSIGNEE IN OCEAN CARRIER B/L WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF EITHER B/L: CONSIGNEE DEFAULTS: WHETHER OCEAN CARRIER B/L SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE DELIVERY

Granville Oils & Chemicals Ltd v. Davies Turner & Co Ltd
Leeds District Registry Mercantile Court: HH Judge Behrens: 21 October 2002
CARRIAGE OF GOODS: DAMAGE IN TRANSIT: FREIGHT FORWARDER: ARRANGEMENT OF INSURANCE COVER: COVER NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLIENT’S INSTRUCTIONS: BRITISH INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION CONDITIONS 1989: WHETHER INCORPORATED INTO FREIGHT CONTRACT: LIMITATION PERIOD OF NINE MONTHS: WHETHER REASONABLE UNDER UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT 1977

APL Co Pte Ltd v Peer Voss
Singapore Court of Appeal: Chao Hick Tin JA, Tan Lee Meng J: 3 October 2002
CARGO SHIPPED PURSUANT TO A STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING: WHETHER CARRIER MAY DELIVER THE CARGO WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF THE BILL OF LADING: WHETHER THERE IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN A STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING AND A SEA WAYBILL

Jindal Iron and Steel Co Limited and Others -v- Islamic Solidarity Shipping Co (Jordan) Inc and another
English Commercial Court: Nigel Teare QC: 25 June 2002
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: VOYAGE CHARTER ON FREE IN OUT STOWED AND TRIMMED ‘FIOST’ TERMS: SUBJECT TO HAGUE-VISBY RULES: WHETHER FIOST TERMS MAKE CARGO INTERESTS RESPONSIBLE FOR CARGO LOSS/DAMAGE OCCURRING IN THOSE OPERATIONS: CARRIER’S OBLIGATIONS UNDER HAGUE-VISBY RULES ARTICLE III RULE 2: WHETHER IN CONFLICT WITH FIOST PROVISIONS

Kinetics Technology v. Cross Seas Shipping, the "Mosconici"
English Commercial Court: Steel J.: [2001] 2 Lloyd's Rep 313: 16 February 2001
DAMAGE TO CARGO : QUANTUM : LIMITATION OF LIABILITY : SPECIAL DRAWING RIGHTS: CONVERSION INTO WHICH CURRENCY: US DOLLARS: GROSS RATE OF INTEREST: PRIME RATE: ADJUSTMENT TO INTEREST TO REFLECT LIMITATION EXPRESSED IN SDRs : DATE FROM WHICH INTEREST SHOULD RUN

James N. Kirby Pty, Ltd. v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
United States Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals: Edmondson, Carnes and Siler: August 8, 2002
Maritime: Bill of Lading: FIATA Multimodal Transport Bill of Lading: United States Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, COGSA: Clause Paramount: Himalaya Clause: Freight Forwarder: NVOC: Inland Rail Carrier: Whether Inland Rail Carrier May Rely on Protections of COGSA By Virtue Of Himalaya Clause In Ocean Carrier’s and/or Freight Forwarder’s Bills of Lading

Trafigura Beheer BV v. Golden Stavraetos Maritime Inc.
English High Court, Commercial Division: Morrison J.: 12 June 2002: [2002] EWHC 1154 (Comm)
VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: ARTICLE III RULE 6 HAGUE-VISBY RULES: NON-DELIVERY OF CARGO AT DESTINATION: CLAIM FOR CONTAMINATION: CARGO ON-CARRIED TO NEW DESTINATION FOR DISCHARGE THERE: LIMITATION PERIODS: WHETHER LIMITATION PERIOD STARTED ON NON-DELIVERY AT ORIGINAL DESTINATION OR ON COMPLETION OF DISCHARGE AT ALTERNATIVE DESTINATION

Voss Peer v APL Co PTE Limited 
Singapore High Court: Judith Prakash J. [2002] 3 SLR 176: 23 April 2002 
CARGO CONSIGNED UNDER NON-NEGOTIABLE (‘STRAIGHT’) BILL OF LADING: CARGO DELIVERED WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF BILL OF LADING: WHETHER DELIVERY OF BILL OF LADING TO CARRIER REQUIRED: STRAIGHT BILLS DISTINGUISHED FROM WAYBILLS

Daewoo Heavy Industries Limited v Klipriver Shipping Limited
English High Court, Commercial Court: Langley J.: 11 July 2002 
CARRIAGE OF CARGO ON DECK IN BREACH OF CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: CARGO LOST OVERBOARD AND DAMAGED: HAGUE RULES: PERILS OF THE SEA: INSUFFICIENCY OF PACKING: WHETHER EXCEPTION CLAUSES UNDER ARTICLE IV RULE 2 APPLIED: WHETHER LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CLAUSE UNDER ARTICLE IV RULE 5 APPLIED

Owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship "David Agmashenebeli" v Owners of the Ship "David Agmashenebeli"
English Admiralty Court: Colman J.: 31 May 2002
CARGO: CLEAN BILLS OF LADING: CLAUSED BILLS OF LADING: ARTICLE III RULE 3: HAGUE-VISBY RULES:STATEMENT AS TO APPARENT ORDER AND CONDITION OF GOODS: SCOPE OF MASTER'S DUTY

COSCO Bulk Carrier Co. Ltd v. Tokio Marine & Fire Ins. Co. Ltd
New York Arbitration: Nigel J. Hawkins, James J. Warfield and Klaus C.J. Mordhorst, arbitrators: 12 April 2002 
CARRIAGE OF US YELLOW CORN: CLEAN BILLS OF LADING: DAMAGE ON OUTTURN: WHETHER PRIMA FACIE CASE AGAINST CARRIER: APPARENT ORDER AND CONDITION: INHERENT VICE: HIGH MOISTURE CONTENT: RELEVANCE OF NCB CERTIFICATE: BURDEN OF PROOF

Tasman Orient Line CV v. Dairy Containers Ltd ( the "Tasman Discoverer")
Court of Appeal of New Zealand: Keith, Blanchard and Anderson, JJ: 17 June July 2002
CARGO DAMAGED ON SEA VOYAGE: BILL OF LADING: HAGUE RULES CONTRACTUALLY INCORPORATED INTO B/L: ART. IV RULE 5 AND ART.IX ESTABLISH PACKAGE LIMIT AS VALUE OF £100 STERLING IN GOLD AS AT 1924: B/L PROVIDES FOR PACKAGE LIMITATION OF £100 STERLING LAWFUL MONEY OF THE UK: CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT: HAGUE RULES APPLY, AS AMENDED BY LIMITATION CLAUSE IN B/L: PARAMOUNTCY CLAUSES ALSO SUBJECT TO CONTRACTUAL LIMITATION

Rapiscan Asia Pte Ltd v Global Container Freight Pte Ltd
Singapore High Court: S. Rajendran J: April 2002
ORAL CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE– WHETHER OBLIGATION TO MONITOR SHIPMENT AND REPORT ON ITS PROGRESS - INCORPORATION OF SINGAPORE FREIGHT FORWARDING ASSOCIATION CONDITIONS – INCORPORATION OF TERMS OF BILL OF LADING WHICH WAS ONLY ISSUED AFTER THE CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE WAS ENTERED INTO – WHETHER EXEMPTION AND LIMITATION CLAUSES IN THE SINGAPORE FREIGHT FORWARDING ASSOCIATION CONDITIONS AND THE BILL OF LADING EXCLUDED OR LIMITED LIABILITY ARISING FROM NEGLIGENCE 

Senator Lines GmbH & Co. v. Sunway Line, Inc. and Others
United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals: Sotomayor, Katzmann and Parker, Jr.: 291 F.2d 145 (2d Cir. 2002
: May 17, 2002
Maritime: United States Carriage of Goods by Sea Act: COGSA: Hague Rules: Inherently Dangerous Cargo: Thiourea Dioxide: Shipper’s Liability: Strict Liability: Knowledge or Constructive Knowledge: International Uniformity: Whether Shipper Strictly Liable Under COGSA For Damage Caused By Inherently Dangerous Cargo Where Neither Shipper Nor Carrier Knew Of Dangerous Nature Of Cargo

Glencore International AG v. Owners of the "CHERRY"
Singapore High Court: Kan Ting Chiu J.: April 2002
Discharge of oil without production of bill of lading: conversion: title to sue: holder of bill of lading: meaning of "possession" in section 5 of the Bills of Lading Act (Cap 384): whether time charterers were the agents of the plaintiff voyage charterers

Schenker International (Australia) Pty Ltd v. Siemens Ltd
New South Wales Supreme Court, Court of Appeal: Meagher, Sheller and Stein JA: [2002] NSWCA 172: June 2002
AVIATION: CARRIAGE BY AIR: DAMAGE TO CARGO BETWEEN AIRPORT OF DESTINATION AND BONDED WAREHOUSE: WARSAW CONVENTION, ARTICLES 18 AND 22: MEANING OF ‘IN AN AERODROME’: DEFINITION OF AIRPORT SITE: CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE AIR WAYBILL: WHETHER LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CLAUSE APPLIES TO TRANSPORTATION AFTER AIR CARRIAGE COMPLETE

J T MacWilliam Co Inc v. Mediterranean Shipping Co. SA – the ‘Rafaela S’
English High Court, Commercial Division: Langley J.: April 2002
SHIPPING: CARRIAGE OF GOODS: THROUGH TRANSPORT BILL OF LADING: ONE VOYAGE OR TWO: TRANSHIPMENT IN UK: APPLICABILITY OF UK VERSION OF HAGUE-VISBY RULES (UKCOGSA 1971); APPLICATION OF USCOGSA: DOCUMENT OF TITLE: CHARACTERISTIC OF TRANSFERABILITY: STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING, NAMING CONSIGNEE: STRAIGHT BILLS NOT SUBJECT TO UK COGSA

Parsons Corporation & Others v. CV Scheepvaartonderneming – the ‘Happy Ranger’
English Court of Appeal: Aldous, Rix and Tuckey LJJ.: May 2002
SHIPPING: CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: SPECIMEN BILL OF LADING: GENERAL PARAMOUNT CLAUSES: WHETHER CONTRACT COVERED BY A BILL OF LADING WITHIN ARTICLE I(B) OF HAGUE/HAGUE-VISBY RULES: STRAIGHT BILLS OF LADING: WHETHER BILLS STRAIGHT BILLS: APPLICATION OF HAGUE/HAGUE/VISBY RULES TO STRAIGHT BILLS: LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: ARTICLE IV RULE 5: MEANING OF ‘IN ANY EVENT’

Quantum Corporation Ltd v. Plane Trucking Ltd and Air France
English Court of Appeal: Aldous, Mance and Latham LJJ: March 2002
CARRIAGE BY AIR: CARRIAGE BY ROAD: APPLICABILITY OF CMR CONVENTION IN MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORT

Trane Company v. Hanjin Shipping Co. Ltd.
Hong Kong High Court: Stone J.: July 2001
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: DAMAGE: BILL OF LADING: SUBJECT TO LEGISLATION ‘COMPULSORILY APPLICABLE’ IN COUNTRY OF SHIPMENT: WHETHER COMPULSORILY APPLICABLE BY LAW OF COUNTRY OF SHIPMENT: WHETHER COMPULSORILY APPLICABLE BY PROPER LAW OF CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: USCOGSA: HAGUE RULES 1924: CONFLICT OF LAWS: HONG KONG CONFLICT LAW: CLOSEST AND MOST REAL CONNECTION: US LAW

Center Optical (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Jardine Transport Services (China) Ltd.
Hong Kong High Court: Stone J.: [2001] HKEC 911: July 2001
CARRIAGE BY SEA: BILLS OF LADING: DELIVERY WITHOUT PRODUCTION OF BILLS OF LADING: IDENTITY OF CARRIER: EXCULPATORY CLAUSES: PERIOD OF RESPONSIBILITY: FAILURE OF CONSIGNEE TO TAKE DELIVERY: DELIVERY TO BE GIVEN ONLY AGAINST PRODUCTION OF ORIGINAL B/L: CAUSE OF LOSS: DUTY TO MITIGATE: WHETHER LEGAL PROCEEDINGS SHOULD BE TAKEN AGAINST DEBTOR

Michael S Evryalos Maritime Ltd v. China Pacific Insurance Co Ltd - " The Michael S" 
English Commercial Court: Colman. J: December 2001
ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTION: DAMAGE TO CARGO: BILLS OF LADING: CHARTERPARTY: WHETHER ARBITRATION CLAUSE INCORPORATED INTO BILLS OF LADING: CONFLICT BETWEEN CONGENBILL EDITIONS 1978 AND 1994: CONSTRUCTION: RECTIFICATION: EVIDENCE OF MUTUAL INTENTION IN WORDING OF BILLS: S.5(1)(A) CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT 1992: BILLS OF LADING ACT 1855: CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE ‘EVIDENCED BY B/L’: WHETHER CHANGE IN LAW INTENDED: LAW COMMISSION REPORT: LEDUC V WARD: POSITION OF INDORSEE: NOTICE

Kithan Ltd V A&G International Cargo Ltd
Hong Kong District Court: Carlson J.: [2001] HKEC 977: July 2001
CARRIAGE BY AIR: DELIVERY BY ROAD: SHORTAGE DISCOVERED ON DELIVERY: WHETHER DEFENDANTS UNDERTOOK TO DELIVER CONSIGNMENT AND ITS CONTENTS: NEGLIGENCE: CONSIGNMENT IN APPARENT GOOD CONDITION: CLEAN RECEIPT TO TERMINAL OPERATOR: OBLIGATION OF HAULIER: EXTENSION OF AIR WAYBILL TO LAND HAULAGE: APPLICATION OF STANDARD TRADING CONDITIONS: COURSE OF DEALING: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EXPORT AND IMPORT CONSIGNMENTS

Seapower Resources Cold Storage & Warehousing Ltd. v. Assure Company Ltd.
Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Gill J.: December 2001
STORAGE: STORAGE CONTRACT: WHETHER SPECIFIC STORAGE TEMPERATURE REQUESTED: CARGO STORED AT TOO HIGH A TEMPERATURE: CARGO DAMAGE: CAUSE OF DAMAGE: WHETHER EXCULPATORY CLAUSES OF GODOWN WARRANT INCLUDED IN STORAGE CONTRACT: NO NOTICE GIVEN OF EXISTENCE OF CLAUSES AT TIME CONTRACT CONCLUDED: WHETHER FAILURE TO STORE AT REQUESTED TEMPERATURE AMOUNTED TO REPUDIATION OF CONTRACT: WHERE CONTRACT REPUDIATED STORAGE CHARGES NOT RECOVERABLE

TICC Limited v. COSCO (UK) Ltd
English Court of Appeal: Ward, Kay and Rix LJJ: Unreported: 5 December 2001 
BILLS OF LADING: CONSIGNEES: SHIPPING LINES: FREIGHT NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN LINES’ UK AGENTS AND CONSIGNEES IN UK: FREIGHT COLLECT BsL: ASSURANCES FROM UK AGENTS: FREIGHT SURCHARGE ANNOUNCED BY CIRCULAR IN HONG KONG TO SHIPPERS: WHETHER INCORPORATED IN BsL: SHIPPERS NOT CONSIGNEES’ AGENTS: NOTICE NOT EFFECTIVE TO BIND CONSIGNEES
Case Note based on an Article in the December 2001 Edition of the ‘Bulletin’, published by the Marine and Insurance teams at the international firm of lawyers, DLA

Alimport v. Soubert Shipping Co. Ltd
English High Court: Walker J: June 2000
ANTE-DATED BILLS OF LADING ISSUED BY TIMECHARTERERS’ AGENTS: NO ACTUAL OR IMPLIED AUTHORITY: SHIPPERS DEEMED UNAWARE OF ANTE-DATING: WHETHER SHIPOWNERS LIABLE TO INNOCENT THIRD PARTY HOLDERS FOR VALUE: OSTENSIBLE AUTHORITY OF AGENTS

Anchor Shipping Company v. Alianca Navegacao e Logistica Ltda
Arbitration Award of the Society of Maritime Arbitrators, New York: Lucienne Bulow as Sole Arbitrator: July 2001
SERVICE CONTRACT: SUBJECT TO NEW YORK LAW: BREACH: PROVEN DAMAGES RECOVERABLE: FREIGHT DIFFERENTIALS: LOST BUSINESS:

Borealis Ab v. Stargas Ltd. and Bergesen D.Y. A/S, the "Berge Sisar"  
English House of Lords: judgement of Lord Hobhouse: March 2001: [2001] 1 All ER (Comm)
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT, 1992: DELIVERY AND DEMAND FOR DELIVERY UNDER Section 3(1)(c): EXTINCTION OF LIABILITIES ON SUBSEQUENT TRANSFER under Section 2(1).

Dairy Containers Ltd v. Tasman Orient Line, the "Tasman Discoverer"
High Court of New Zealand: Williams J.: July 2001
CARGO DAMAGED ON SEA VOYAGE: BILL OF LADING: PACKAGE LIMITATION OF £100 STERLING LAWFUL MONEY OF THE UK: HAGUE RULES CONTRACTUALLY INCORPORATED INTO B/L IN ENTIRETY: ART.IV RULE 5 AND ART.IX ESTABLISH PACKAGE LIMIT AS VALUE OF £100 STERLING IN GOLD AS AT 1924: B/L GIVES PRECEDENCE TO HAGUE RULES IN EVENT OF CONFLICT WITH B/L TERMS: ART III RULE 8 TO SAME EFFECT: CONFLICT BETWEEN B/L PACKAGE LIMIT AND HAGUE RULES PACKAGE LIMIT: HAGUE RULES LIMIT PREVAILS

Cargo on Board MV'Delos' v. Delos Shipping
English High Court: Langley J.: January 2001: [2001] 1 AER 763
VOYAGE CHARTERPARTY: ARBITRATION CLAUSE: INCORPORATION INTO BILLS OF LADING.

Demand Shipping Co Ltd v. Ministry of Food of Bangladesh – the ‘Lendoudis Evangelos II’
English High Court: Cresswell J: June 2001
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA: EMERGENCY FUEL OIL SHUT-OFF VALVE ACTIVATED BY UNKNOWN CREW MEMBER: GENERAL AVERAGE ACCIDENT: ACCESS TO VALVE NOT PROTECTED BY GLASS PANEL: UNSEAWORTHINESS:PURPOSE OF SHUT-OFF VALVE: UNPRECENTED INCIDENT: WEIGHING COMPARATIVE RISKS: REASONABLENESS: EFFECT ON CAUSATION HAD GLASS PANEL BEEN PRESENT

DFS Trading Ltd. v. Swiss Air Transport Co. Ltd. and Jacky Maeder (Geneva and Hong Kong)
Hong Kong Court of First Instance: Stone J.: [2001 HKEC 589]: May 2001-12-27
CARRIAGE BY AIR: AMENDED WARSAW CONVENTION: VALUABLE CONSIGNMENT SHIPPED AS GENERAL, NOT VALUABLE, CARGO: THEFT OF CONSIGNMENT DURING CARRIAGE: WHETHER CARRIER’S LIABILITY LIMITED UNDER ARTICLE 22 AWC: WHETHER CARRIER’S LIABILITY UNLIMITED UNDER ARTICLE 25 AWC: WHETHER LOSS AROSE RECKLESSLY AND WITH KNOW LEDGE THAT LOSS WOULD PROBABLY RESULT: SUBJECTIVE TEST: BEARER STATUS OF SHIPMENT RELEASE FORM: EFFECT OF KNOWLEDGE OF BEARER STATUS: WHETHER CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE UNDER ARTICLE 21 AWC

Transpacific Discovery SA v. Cargill International SA. – The Elpa
English Commercial Court: Morison J.: April 2001: Unreported
INTER-CLUB AGREEMENT: NEW YORK PRODUCE EXCHANGE FORM OF C/P: CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO Bs/L FOR INTER-CLUB AGREEMENT TO APPLY.

European Gas Turbines Ltd v. (1) MSAS Cargo International, (2) Hapag-Lloyd AG and (3) Hapag-Lloyd (UK) Ltd.
English High Court: Popplewell J:[2001] CLC 880: May 2000
NEGLIGENCE: NATURE OF DAMAGE: APPREHENSION OF DAMAGE IS NOT DAMAGE: ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY: RECOVERABILITY OF ECONOMIC LOSS: NOT INCONSISTENT WITH CONTRACTUAL STRUCTURE

Parsons Corporation v. Owners of Happy Ranger
English High Court, Commercial Division: Tomlinson J.: Unreported: July 2001
CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE: INCORPORATION OF TERMS OF CARRIER’S BILL OF LADING: IN CASE OF CONFLICT, CONTRACT TERMS TO PREVAIL: ‘SHIPPED ON DECK’ CLAUSE: HAGUE RULES TO APPLY AS ENACTED IN COUNTRY OF SHIPMENT; HAGUE-VISBY RULES APPLY WHERE COMPULSORILY APPLICABLE: OTHERWISE ARTICLES I TO
VIII OF THE 1924 CONVENTION TO APPLY: ENGLISH LAW PROPER LAW OF THE CONTRACT: CARGO DAMAGE DURING LOADING: NO B/LS ISSUED: PACKAGE LIMITATION

Quantum Corporation Ltd v. Plane Trucking Ltd and Air France
English High Court Commercial Division: Tomlinson J.: April 2001: 2001 2 LLR 133
CARRIAGE BY AIR: CARRIAGE BY ROAD: APPLICABILITY OF CMR CONVENTION IN MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORT: INTERPRETATION OF AIR FRANCE CONDITIONS OF CARRIAGE

Siemens Ltd v. Schenker International (Australia) Pty Ltd and Schenker International Deutschland GmbH
New South Wales Supreme Court: Barrett J.
[2001] NSWSC 658: August 2001
AVIATION: CARRIAGE BY AIR: DAMAGE TO CARGO BETWEEN AIRPORT OF DESTINATION AND BONDED WAREHOUSE: WARSAW CONVENTION, ARTICLES 18 AND 22: MEANING OF ‘IN AN AERODROME’: DEFINITION OF AIRPORT SITE: WHETHER WAREHOUSE OUTSIDE AIRPORT BOUNDARY: CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE AIR WAYBILL: WHETHER LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CLAUSE APPLIES TO TRANSPORTATION AFTER AIR CARRIAGE COMPLETE: COMMON LAW LIABILITY FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT

The "Starsin"
English Court of Appeal: Rix, Chadwick LJJ., the Vice-Chancellor: January 2001
1) OWNERS’ OR CHARTERERS’ BILLS OF LADING: BILLS ON CHARTERERS’ FORM SIGNED ON BEHALF OF CHARTERERS ‘AS CARRIERS’: EFFECT OF IDENTITY OF CARRIER AND DEMISE CLAUSES IN BILLS
2) OWNERS’ LIABILITY IN TORT: DAMAGE CAUSED BY CONDENSATION ARISING FROM BAD STOWAGE FOR WHICH OWNERS RESPONSIBLE: DAMAGE FIRST OCCURRED SHORTLY AFTER SHIP SAILED FROM LAST LOADING PORT: DAMAGE CAUSED BEFORE CLAIMANTS (EXCEPT ONE) ACQUIRED TITLE: WHETHER DUTY OF CARE OWED TO SUBSEQUENT OWNERS OF CARGO: DAMAGE SUBSEQUENT TO CLAIMANTS ACQUIRING TITLE ONLY A PROGRESSION OF DAMAGE ALREADY CAUSED: NO NEW NEGLIGENCE NOR NEW DAMAGE: THEREFORE TORTIOUS LIABILITY ONLY TO CLAIMANT WHO ACQUIRED TITLE BEFORE DAMAGE FIRST SUSTAINED
3) IF BILLS OF LADING ARE CHARTERERS’ BILLS, OWNERS ARE CHARTERERS’ SUBCONTRACTORS TO CARRY OUT VOYAGE: WHETHER HIMALAYA CLAUSE (PART 1) PROTECTS SUBCONTRACTORS FROM SUIT: PART 1 PROTECTS ONLY CARRIER: SUBCONTRACTORS’ LIABILITY NOT LESS THAN CARRIER’S

Steelmet Pte Ltd v. APL Co. Pte Ltd
High Court of Singapore: Justice Judith Prakash: 27 November 2000: unreported
Case Note contributed by Ang & Partners, International Contributors for Singapore
BILL OF LADING: WHETHER CLAIMANT WAS "HOLDER" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE BILLS OF LADING ACT AT TIME OF SUIT: CONVERSION: RIGHT TO SUE: RIGHT TO IMMEDIATE POSSESSION OF THE GOODS

 

These Case Notes have been prepared with care, but neither the Editor nor the International and other Contributors can guarantee that they are free from error, nor that they contain every pertinent point. Reliance should not therefore be placed upon them without independent verification. The Editor and the International and other Contributors disclaim all liability for any loss of whatsoever nature and howsoever arising as a result of others acting or refraining from acting in reliance on the contents of this website and the information to which it gives access. The Editor claims copyright in the content of the website.