AMS Ameropa Marketing Sales AG & Anor v Ocean Unity Navigation Inc
[2023] EWHC 3264 (Comm)
JB Cocoa Sdn Bhd & Ors v Maersk Line AS
5 September 2023
[2023] EWHC 2203 (Comm)
High Court
A company's cocoa beans got moldy because they weren't picked up from the port on time. The shipping company said they weren't responsible anymore once they unloaded the beans, and the court agreed. The company that bought the cocoa beans lost money, but the court said it was their fault for not picking up the beans promptly.
Key Facts
- •Claimants sought €185,355.78 damages from Maersk Line for mould and condensation damage to a cocoa bean cargo.
- •Cargo was carried under a bill of lading from Lagos to Tanjung Pelepas.
- •Cargo was discharged on 30 September/1 October 2017 but not collected until 28 November 2017.
- •Damage was attributed to prolonged storage in containers after discharge.
- •Claimants included the alleged cargo owner, bill of lading holder, and insurers.
- •Defendant argued that the bill of lading exempted it from liability and that damage was due to inherent vice.
- •Conflicting expert evidence was presented regarding the cause of damage and the cargo's condition upon loading.
Legal Principles
Rights of suit under a contract of carriage can be transferred to the lawful holder of a bill of lading or to a person to whom delivery is to be made.
Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992, Section 2
A carrier's liability for loss or damage to goods is governed by the Hague Rules between loading and discharge, unless the contract provides otherwise.
Hague Rules, Articles I(e), II; Fimbank Plc v KCH Shipping Co Ltd (“The Giant Ace”) [2023] EWCA Civ 569
In a bailment, a bailee (carrier) has the legal burden of proving that damage to goods did not result from their breach of duty of care, or that damage was caused by an excepted peril.
Volcafe Ltd v Cia Sud Americana de Vapores SA [2018] UKSC 61
To rely on the exception for inherent vice, a carrier must show they took reasonable care, or that damage would have occurred despite reasonable care.
Volcafe Ltd v Cia Sud Americana de Vapores SA [2018] UKSC 61
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
Defendant's responsibility ended upon discharge of the cargo. Damage occurred after discharge due to claimants' delay in collecting the goods. Claimants failed to prove that the cargo was in unsound condition upon loading, or that the defendant failed to take reasonable care before discharge.