Compaq Computer Manufacturing Ltd v Circle International Ltd & Anor [2000] ScotCS 271 (3 November 2000)

Compaq Computer Manufacturing Ltd v Circle International Ltd & Anor [2000] ScotCS 271 (3 November 2000)

The contracting carrier (defenders) cannot be 'the person entitled to delivery' for the purposes of Article 26 of the Warsaw Convention; therefore, written notice of damage given by the defenders to the actual carrier does not satisfy the Convention's requirement for timeous notice by the party entitled to claim for cargo damage.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 271
Parties
Pursuer: Compaq Computer Manufacturing Limited; Defender: Circle International Limited; Third Party: Federal Express Corporation
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute (carriage of Goods by Air) / Procedure Roll Debate (interlocutory, on Relevancy of Pleadings and Interpretation of Conventions)
Outcome
No final order; case put out By Order to allow pursuers to amend pleadings and for further discussion on pleas-in-law.
Legal Topics
Carriage of Goods by Air, Interpretation of Warsaw and Guadalajara Conventions, Notice Requirements for Cargo Damage, Jurisdiction Under International Conventions
Commercial Law Transport Law International Law Carriage of Goods by Air Interpretation of Warsaw and Guadalajara Conventions Notice Requirements for Cargo Damage Jurisdiction Under International Conventions

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Compaq Computer Manufacturing Limited

Pursuer

Circle International Limited

Defender

Federal Express Corporation

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute (carriage of Goods by Air) / Procedure Roll Debate (interlocutory, on Relevancy of Pleadings and Interpretation of Conventions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders (contracting carrier) can be 'the person entitled to delivery' for the purpose of giving notice under Article 26 of the Warsaw Convention
  2. 2 Whether written notice of damage given by the defenders to the third parties (actual carrier) within seven days satisfies Article 26(2) of the Warsaw Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The contracting carrier (defenders) cannot be 'the person entitled to delivery' for the purposes of Article 26 of the Warsaw Convention; therefore, written notice of damage given by the defenders to the actual carrier does not satisfy the Convention's requirement for timeous notice by the party entitled to claim for cargo damage.

Court Disposition

No final order; case put out By Order to allow pursuers to amend pleadings and for further discussion on pleas-in-law.