TRI RUSS INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHINA OCEAN SHIPPING CO (SHANGHAI BRANCH) AND ANOTHER

TRI RUSS INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHINA OCEAN SHIPPING CO (SHANGHAI BRANCH) AND ANOTHER

The court found on the evidence that the 2nd Defendant negligently stored the goods under an inadequate thin canvas cover causing the water damage; there was no binding agreement limiting admitted damage to 193 cartons; the Hague Rules govern the relationship and, absent a plausible exonerating explanation from the defendants, both defendants are liable; judgment entered for the plaintiffs as claimed.

Citation
TRI RUSS INTERNATIONAL (HK) LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHINA OCEAN SHIPPING CO (SHANGHAI BRANCH) AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Tri Russ International (HK) Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: China National Arts and Crafts Import and Export Corporation Jiangsu Branch; 1st Defendant: China Ocean Shipping Company (Shanghai Branch); 2nd Defendant: Euroasia Dockyard Enterprises and Development Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 November 1990
Case Number
HCCL171/1988
Procedural Posture
Cargo Claim (maritime) / Trial Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiffs against both Defendants
Legal Topics
Cargo Damage, Storage and Custody, Hague Rules Application, Survey Evidence, Mitigation of Damages, Liability Allocation
Source Language
EN
Maritime Law Shipping Contract Tort Negligence Carriage of Goods Cargo Damage Storage and Custody +4 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tri Russ International (HK) Limited

1st Plaintiff

China National Arts and Crafts Import and Export Corporation Jiangsu Branch

2nd Plaintiff

China Ocean Shipping Company (Shanghai Branch)

1st Defendant

Euroasia Dockyard Enterprises and Development Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Cargo Claim (maritime) / Trial Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants were liable for water damage to cargo while stored at the shipyard
  2. 2 Whether there was an agreement limiting the admitted damage to 193 cartons
  3. 3 Whether the defendants exercised proper care in storing and covering the goods

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the evidence that the 2nd Defendant negligently stored the goods under an inadequate thin canvas cover causing the water damage; there was no binding agreement limiting admitted damage to 193 cartons; the Hague Rules govern the relationship and, absent a plausible exonerating explanation from the defendants, both defendants are liable; judgment entered for the plaintiffs as claimed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiffs against both Defendants

Orders

  • Judgment entered as claimed in the amended Points of Claim against both Defendants
  • Plaintiffs entitled to their costs subject to any submissions