← All Authorities
United Kingdom Leading Case bills of ladinglegal and evidential burden

Volcafe Ltd v Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA

[2018] UKSC 61
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtUK Supreme Court
Year2018
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Under Hague Rules Art IV r2, the burden lies on the carrier to prove cargo damage resulted from an excepted peril, not on the cargo owner to prove negligent care.

Key Principle

Under Article IV Rule 2(q) of the Hague Rules, the burden of proving that cargo damage was not caused by a failure to properly care for the cargo lies on the carrier; the carrier must prove that the damage was caused by an excepted peril.

Area of Law

shipping

Related Cases

Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA v Hin-Pro International Logistics Ltd (2016) 19 HKCFAR 586

An exclusive jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading may be enforced by anti-suit injunction, balancing comity and the strength of the clause.

CIMB Bank Bhd v World Fuel Services (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2021] SGCA 19

Singapore Court of Appeal considered maritime liens for necessaries (bunker supply), title to sue under transferred bills of lading, and privity/assignment issues in shipping claims.

Nippon Catalyst Pte Ltd v PT Trans-Pacific Petrochemical Indotama [2018] SGHC 126

Under a bill of lading governed by the Hague-Visby Rules, a carrier's obligation to properly load and stow cargo is non-delegable.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Volcafe Ltd v Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Volcafe Ltd v Compania Sud Ame...