A valuable cargo was stolen whilst being transported. Part of the journey was by road, and part by air. The carriers sought to limit their liability, because of the provisions of the Act and Convention. It was argued that that did not apply, because part of the journey had been by air, and part only by road. Did liability depend upon the carrier having explicitly contracted to transport part way by road, and could a convention contract include a part transport by means other than road?
Held: The Convention applied to a ‘contract for the carriage of goods by road’. Authority established that the Convention applied where the carrier either promised unconditionally to carry by road, and on a trailer, possibly reserving an option to transport by different means for all or part of the way and left the means open, so that carriage by road was a possibility. It applied here, and remained open to the claimants to argue under article 29 that the limitation should not apply because of the way it had happened.
Judges:
Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Mance and Lord Justice Latham
Citations:
Times 18-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 350, [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 25, [2002] 1 WLR 2678, [2003] 1 All ER 873, [2002] 2 All ER (Comm) 392
Links:
Statutes:
Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road Art 1, 17, 29, Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Datec Electronics Holdings Ltd and others v United Parcels Services Ltd HL 16-May-2007
The defendants had taken on the delivery of a quantity of the claimant’s computers. The equipment reached one depot, but then was lost or stolen. The parties disputed whether the Convention rules applied. UPS said that the claimant had agreed that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Transport
Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.169835
