ERICSSON LTD AND ANOTHER v. KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES AND OTHERS

ERICSSON LTD AND ANOTHER v. KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES AND OTHERS

On the balance of probabilities both thefts were committed with inside involvement of HACTL employees; the AWC/Guadalajara do not preclude concurrent common law claims against servants/agents; the writ indorsements were broad enough to stop time under Article 29; accordingly Article 25 intent is satisfied so Article 22 monetary limits do not apply as against KLM (actual carrier), ASG Sweden (contracting carrier) and HACTL (agent), and HACTL is not entitled to invoke Article 22 or Article 25A; contractual indemnities and contribution relief were ordered in favour of KLM and ASG Sweden against HACTL according to the contractual arrangements.

Citation
ERICSSON LTD AND ANOTHER v. KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Ericsson Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Ericsson Mobile Communications AB; 1st Defendant: KLM Royal Dutch Airlines; 2nd Defendant: KLM Cargo; 3rd Defendant: ASG Air & Sea AB (Danzas AEI Continental AB); 4th Defendant: APC Asia Pacific Cargo (H.K.) Limited (ASG Hong Kong); 5th Defendant: Hong Kong Air Cargo Terminals Limited (HACTL); 6th Defendant: Jardine Airport Services Limited (JASL)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 December 2005
Case Number
HCCL2/2000
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action (hccl 202/1999 and HCCL 2/2000) / Judgment (court of First Instance)
Outcome
Plaintiffs succeeded in breaking Article 22 limit for both thefts; judgment entered for 2nd plaintiff (Ericsson Mobile Communications AB) against 1st defendant (KLM), 3rd defendant (ASG Sweden) and 5th defendant (HACTL) for the invoice values; claims against 4th defendant (ASG Hong Kong) and 6th defendant (JASL)...
Legal Topics
Amended Warsaw Convention (awc), Guadalajara Convention, Article 22 Limitation, Article 25 Breaking Limit (intent and Recklessness), Article 29 Time Bar, Agency and Servants/agents Liability, Indemnity and Contribution, Quantum of Damages, Procedure Re Relation Back
Source Language
EN
Carriage by Air International Conventions Commercial Law Tort (negligence and Bailment) Contract (indemnity and Third Party Claims) Civil Contribution Amended Warsaw Convention (awc) Guadalajara Convention +7 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 7 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ericsson Limited

1st Plaintiff

Ericsson Mobile Communications AB

2nd Plaintiff

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

1st Defendant

KLM Cargo

2nd Defendant

ASG Air & Sea AB (Danzas AEI Continental AB)

3rd Defendant

APC Asia Pacific Cargo (H.K.) Limited (ASG Hong Kong)

4th Defendant

Hong Kong Air Cargo Terminals Limited (HACTL)

5th Defendant

Jardine Airport Services Limited (JASL)

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action (hccl 202/1999 and HCCL 2/2000) / Judgment (court of First Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether AWC/Guadalajara provide an exclusive code preventing concurrent common law claims against servants or agents
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs' Convention claims were time-barred under Article 29
  3. 3 Scope and temporal extent of liability of the actual and contracting carrier under the Conventions

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities both thefts were committed with inside involvement of HACTL employees; the AWC/Guadalajara do not preclude concurrent common law claims against servants/agents; the writ indorsements were broad enough to stop time under Article 29; accordingly Article 25 intent is satisfied so Article 22 monetary limits do not apply as against KLM (actual carrier), ASG Sweden (contracting carrier) and HACTL (agent), and HACTL is not entitled to invoke Article 22 or Article 25A; contractual indemnities and contribution relief were ordered in favour of KLM and ASG Sweden against HACTL according to the contractual arrangements.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs succeeded in breaking Article 22 limit for both thefts; judgment entered for 2nd plaintiff (Ericsson Mobile Communications AB) against 1st defendant (KLM), 3rd defendant (ASG Sweden) and 5th defendant (HACTL) for the invoice values; claims against 4th defendant (ASG Hong Kong) and 6th defendant (JASL)...

Orders

  • Judgment for 2nd plaintiff Ericsson Mobile Communications AB against 1st defendant KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 3rd defendant ASG Air & Sea AB (Danzas AEI Continental AB) and 5th defendant Hong Kong Air Cargo Terminals Limited in HCCL 202/1999 for HK$4,130,000
  • Judgment for 2nd plaintiff Ericsson Mobile Communications AB against 1st defendant KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 3rd defendant ASG Air & Sea AB (Danzas AEI Continental AB) and 5th defendant Hong Kong Air Cargo Terminals Limited in HCCL 2/2000 for HK$12,352,000