B/Ls for reefer containers usually mention the set point to be maintained by the carrier during transit. What if it only mentions ‘frozen seafood’ without a setpoint? Is the carrier to understand that the unit is not to be plugged during transit or do the words 'frozen seafood' signify something? In The Carlotta Star [2023] a French Court had to decide whether the liability for cargo damage in such a case falls on the carrier or on the shipper.
Here the carrier did not connect the reefers because there was no temperature indication on the bill of lading. The cargo of seafood was found damaged upon discharge in Portugal. As per Hague Visby Rules the carrier is not to be held liable for damage to cargo if caused by an act or omission of the shipper, which the carrier was arguing was the case here. Cargo owner was relying on the European Regulation No. 853/2004 which states that the temperature of frozen seafood should be -18 deg C or lower. The words ‘frozen seafood’ should have been enough for the carrier to plug in the reefers and at a minimum maintain -18 deg C.
The lower court decided that omitting the set point from the bill of lading constituted a fault on part of the shipper. The Court of Appeal however was of the opposite view. They said that the carrier was not justified in relying on the absence of the set point on the B/L. They should have been able to interpret the words ‘frozen seafood’ to mean -18 deg C given the European regulations relating to the transport of fishery products.
LinkedIn post - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/siddharthmahajan18_maritimelaw-activity-7086286565835997184-rL5t?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
Comments