Tuesday, 2 October 2007
Forwarderlaw E-news for September 2007
Hello and welcome to all of our readers, and to autumn or spring (depending on your position relative to the equator!).
Negligently Asleep at the Wheel
Establishing wilful misconduct permits a claimant to avoid monetary and time limitations established under the CMR. One might imagine that a driver asleep at the wheel would be a paradigm case of such misconduct, but not the English Court of Appeal, which recently overturned a trial court decision made on just such a basis. UK Editor Paul Bugden comments here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=467
Daisy Chains make for Difficult Cases
International multimodal transport often involves a very large string of intermediaries. Cargo interests tend to sue the closest party to them, even if this party is their agent; third party claims then multiply faster than college students on spring break, and after a year or two of messy litigation a judge will have to try to apportion primary, secondary, and other liability. Steve Block comments on just such a recent case that was determined by California State's Court of Appeals. To read his commentary, click here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=463
Contradictory Positions on Confidential Rate Agreements
The Court of Appeal for Quebec has handed down a decision that appears to conflict with another recent precedent-setting decision by the Federal Court of Canada. In the present case, a derailment caused the loss of cargo, and the intermediary obtained payment of $2/lb from Canadian National railway in accordance with their confidential rate agreement. The actual shipper then sued the railway for the excess, arguing that it was not a party to the confidential rate agreement and that the railway could not invoke its confidential limitation. David Colford comments on the decision in Sumitomo v CN, which provides a stark contrast to his commentary on the Boutique Jacob case:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=464
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=367
The Future of Carrier Antitrust Immunity
The great ocean lines, along with major league baseball, constitute one of the last bastions of anti-trust immunity in the United States. But for how much longer? US Editor Steve Block casts his eyes to the future in this commentary, originally published in "The Transportation Lawyer":
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=465
Consequential Damages 101
Aren't all recoverable damages the consequence of some fault on the part of a tortfeasor? In ordinary English the answer is 'yes', but for lawyers and the courts the nature – and recoverability – of consequential damages is a bit more complex. For a helpful user's guide to consequential damages and economic loss, look no further than Paul Bugden's commentary here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=468
Combined Transport – Road, Rail, River, Air, and Ocean
International Trade Consultant Vlad Cioarec comments on the development of the CIM consignment note and the impact of the CMNI Convention on European transport involving inland waterways. He goes on to discuss combined Air and Sea transport documents in the context of the Warsaw and Montreal conventions. For the full articles, click here:
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=461
http://www.forwarderlaw.com/library/view.php?article_id=462
18 Month Freight Claim Limitation
Congress recodified much of American law governing interstate commerce in the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) in 1995, including the 18-month time bar for claims by carriers for unpaid freight. Steve Block examines the impact this limitation has on brokers and intermediaries: