Volcafe Ltd & Ors v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores SA (t/a CSAV)

Volcafe Ltd & Ors v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores SA (t/a CSAV)

The Court of Appeal held that under the Hague Rules, once the carrier establishes a prima facie case for the application of the inherent vice exception, the burden shifts to the claimant to prove negligence. The carrier does not need to disprove negligence to rely on the exception. The carrier's method of lining containers with kraft paper was consistent with industry practice and constituted a sound system. Minor condensation damage was inevitable in such carriage and did not amount to breach. The Hague Rules applied to the stuffing of containers by the carrier's stevedores as part of the loading process, but this was academic for the outcome.

Parties
Respondent / Claimant: Volcafe Ltd; Respondent / Claimant: Golluecke & Rotheos & Co KG; Respondent / Claimant: Coffein Compagnie CMBH & Co KG; Respondent / Claimant: Dr Erich Scheele GmbH & Co KG; Respondent / Claimant: Coffein Compagnie Dr Erich Scheele GmbH & Co KG; Respondent / Claimant: Lampe & Schwarze KG; Appellant / Defendant: Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA (trading as CSAV)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; carrier's appeal on inherent vice and inevitability of damage succeeded; appeal on temporal scope of Hague Rules dismissed.
Legal Topics
Carriage of Goods by Sea, Hague Rules, Burden of Proof, Inherent Vice, Sound System, Containerised Cargo, Condensation Damage
Commercial Law Shipping Law International Trade Carriage of Goods by Sea Hague Rules Burden of Proof Inherent Vice Sound System +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Volcafe Ltd

Respondent / Claimant

Golluecke & Rotheos & Co KG

Respondent / Claimant

Coffein Compagnie CMBH & Co KG

Respondent / Claimant

Dr Erich Scheele GmbH & Co KG

Respondent / Claimant

Coffein Compagnie Dr Erich Scheele GmbH & Co KG

Respondent / Claimant

Lampe & Schwarze KG

Respondent / Claimant

Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA (trading as CSAV)

Appellant / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct allocation of the burden of proof under the Hague Rules in cargo claims?
  2. 2 Does the exception of inherent vice under Article IV rule 2(m) require the carrier to disprove negligence?
  3. 3 What constitutes a 'sound system' under Article III rule 2 of the Hague Rules?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that under the Hague Rules, once the carrier establishes a prima facie case for the application of the inherent vice exception, the burden shifts to the claimant to prove negligence. The carrier does not need to disprove negligence to rely on the exception. The carrier's method of lining containers with kraft paper was consistent with industry practice and constituted a sound system. Minor condensation damage was inevitable in such carriage and did not amount to breach. The Hague Rules applied to the stuffing of containers by the carrier's stevedores as part of the loading process, but this was academic for the outcome.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; carrier's appeal on inherent vice and inevitability of damage succeeded; appeal on temporal scope of Hague Rules dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment for the carrier (CSAV); claimants' claims dismissed.
  • No order as to the applicability of the carrier's bill of lading terms, as this was not appealed.