Carriers Ponder Dutch Ruling in CMR Dispute

Friday, June 05, 2009

Netherlands law firm AKD Prinsen Van Wijmen says a recent decision of the Dutch Supreme Court indicates that, whilst Holland remains an extremely carrier-friendly jurisdiction for disputes under the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR), a much stricter approach is to be adopted to the Act of God exemption from liability for loss and damage under CMR.

In its April 24 decision in Philips Electronics NV v Vos Logistics, the Supreme Court upheld the earlier decisions of the court of first instance and the Court of Appeal in finding that Vos Logistics could not rely on the CMR Article 17 (2) Act of God defence in respect of the theft of a consignment of electrical goods whilst enroute by road from Belgium to Warsaw, Poland.

Noting that the driver of the consignment knew the valuable nature of the goods, and the high risk of theft associated with them, the Court of Appeal identified a number of factors which it considered significant in terms of the theft. Only one driver had been employed during transit, where two would have provided additional security. The leg of the journey where the theft occurred was undertaken at night, with very little traffic on the roads, and the vehicle was not driven as part of a convoy of trucks. Additionally, the driver was not familiar with the Warsaw area, having never driven there before.

Jos van der Meché, a partner with AKD Prinsen Van Wijmen, said, “The Dutch courts have historically been regarded as generally pro-carrier in their rulings, and they certainly remain so with regard to, for example, relying on the CMR limitation in case of alleged wilful misconduct. But the Supreme Court’s upholding of the decision in Philips v Vos Electronics confirms that carriers will have to demonstrate a greater level of care and diligence in order to bring themselves within the protection of Article 17 (2) of CMR.

“The inference to be drawn from all three court decisions in this case is that the carrier could have done more to protect against the risk of theft. It seems likely that, absent a proper demonstration of measures taken to ensure the safety and security of valuable consignments, carriers will continue to find it difficult to bring themselves within the Act of God exemption under CMR before the Dutch courts.”

(www.akd.nl)

Maritime Reporter June 2014 Digital Edition
FREE Maritime Reporter Subscription
Latest Maritime News    rss feeds

Legal

House Subcommittee Hearing Highlights “Dismal State” of U.S. Icebreaking Capability

At the July 23, 2014, hearing of the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation on “Implementing U.S. Policy in the Arctic” the committee chairman, Rep.

Iraqi Kurdish Oil Nears US Port Despite Concern in Washington

A tanker carrying crude oil from Iraqi Kurdistan is just two days away from arriving at a U.S. port, according to ship tracking satellites, despite Washington's

Maritime NZ Oil Spill Response Review: Submissions

Maritime New Zealand (MNZ) says it invites submissions on its draft updated New Zealand Marine Oil Spill Response Strategy 2014 (the draft Strategy). The draft Strategy, (available at http://bit.

 
 
Maritime Contracts Maritime Standards Pipelines Pod Propulsion Port Authority Salvage Ship Electronics Ship Repair Shipbuilding / Vessel Construction Winch
rss | archive | history | articles | privacy | terms and conditions | contributors | top maritime news | about us | copyright | maritime magazines
maritime security news | shipbuilding news | maritime industry | shipping news | maritime reporting | workboats news | ship design | maritime business

Time taken: 0.1078 sec (9 req/sec)