Category: Transport

re “The DAVID AGMASHENEBELI”: 2003

References: [2003] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 92
Coram: Colman J
Ratio: Tt is the shipper or his agent who is delivering the cargo and so it is the shipper who has actual or imputed knowledge as to its condition. The shipper will or ought to know whether there is any discrepancy between the description of the cargo in the sale documents or supplier’s note and the cargo which is actually to be loaded on board the ship. If the Master is under an obligation to the shipper under Article III(3) of the Hague Visby Rules, the Master must issue a bill of lading indicating the apparent order and condition of the cargo loaded on board. Therefore, before the Master can issue bills of lading that comply with the Hague Visby Rules obligation, he has to take a reasonable, non – expert view of the cargo that is about to be loaded, as he sees it. He must decide whether the ‘apparent order and condition’ of the cargo to be loaded is accurately described in the bills of lading and, if the expression ‘apparent good order and condition’ is used in the bill of lading, whether the apparent order and condition of the cargo is ‘good’, ie. ‘proper’.
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Sea Success Maritime Inc v African Maritime Carriers Ltd ComC (Bailii, [2005] EWHC 1542 (Comm), Times 06-Sep-05)
    The ship’s master had refused to accept the cargo relying on clause 52 of the standard form charterpraty agreement saying that the cargo had been damaged.
    Held: Only if the shippers continued to insist on the description, and the master . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 15 June 2020
Ref: 229996