Stora Enso Oyj v. Port Of Dundee [2006] ScotCS CSOH_40 (08 March 2006)

Stora Enso Oyj v. Port Of Dundee [2006] ScotCS CSOH_40 (08 March 2006)

The parties intended that property and risk in the goods would not pass to the buyer until payment, as provided by Rule 6(c) of the General Trade Rules for Wood Pulp. The use of 'CIP' in the contract was only to allocate costs and did not incorporate Incoterms 2000 or alter the passing of property and risk. At the time of the fire, the goods had not been paid for, so property and risk remained with the seller, and the pursuer had title to sue.

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSOH_40
Parties
Pursuer: Stora Enso Oyj; Defender: Port of Dundee
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Preliminary Proof and Debate on Pleas in Law
Outcome
Defender's second and third pleas-in-law repelled; pursuer has title to sue; case to proceed for further procedure.
Legal Topics
Passing of Property and Risk, Interpretation of Trade Terms (incoterms), Title to Sue, Incorporation of Standard Terms, Insurance and Subrogation
Commercial Law Contract Law Sale of Goods Passing of Property and Risk Interpretation of Trade Terms (incoterms) Title to Sue Incorporation of Standard Terms Insurance and Subrogation

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stora Enso Oyj

Pursuer

Port of Dundee

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Preliminary Proof and Debate on Pleas in Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether property and risk in the goods had passed to the buyer at the time of loss
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer had title to sue for the loss of the goods
  3. 3 Whether the use of 'CIP' and reference to Incoterms altered the passing of property and risk

Ratio Decidendi

The parties intended that property and risk in the goods would not pass to the buyer until payment, as provided by Rule 6(c) of the General Trade Rules for Wood Pulp. The use of 'CIP' in the contract was only to allocate costs and did not incorporate Incoterms 2000 or alter the passing of property and risk. At the time of the fire, the goods had not been paid for, so property and risk remained with the seller, and the pursuer had title to sue.

Court Disposition

Defender's second and third pleas-in-law repelled; pursuer has title to sue; case to proceed for further procedure.

Orders

  • Repel defender's second plea-in-law (as amended) insofar as directed to the second conclusion.
  • Repel defender's third plea-in-law.