A HIGH German federal court, upholding a lower court ruling, which overturned a still lower court's decision, has ended a debate over which liability system prevails in air cargo - the Montreal Convention or the German Commercial Code, according London's International Law Office, a legal news and commentary portal.
The plaintiff, the shipper's insurer, claimed compensation for loss of cargo from the defendant parcel service, which was flown from Cologne to Miami, then moved to the airline's warehouse, but was not delivered to the Miami consignee.
At first, the Dusseldorf District Court allowed the claim and ordered the defendant to pay EUR17,234 (US$22,667) in compensation plus interest based on the Commercial Code, ruling that the Montreal Convention did not apply because overland carriage was not mentioned in the air waybill.
But on appeal, the Dusseldorf Higher Regional Court ruled in favour of the less severe from the defendant's view point, Montreal Convention, and cut the award in half to EUR8,258 plus interest to cover the actual cargo loss alone.
In the next appeal, the Federal Court of Justice dismissed the claimant's plea and confirmed that judgment, ruling that the Montreal Convention prevailed in cases of overland carriage to an air carrier's warehouse following carriage by air.
With this judgment, the high court ended the debate over which system applies to an air carrier's liability for loss or damage to cargo when the cargo has left the airport, but has been brought to the air carrier's warehouse, said the commentary on the case.
"Views differed as to whether the national law or the Montreal Convention should apply. The [German] federal court has now settled for the Montreal Convention, ruling that an air carrier is liable for the entire time the goods are within its custody and extended the liability to risks which are not purely air transport, said the report, signed by Jens Jaeger or Marco Remiorz, lawyers at Hamburg's Dabelstein & Passehl.
Source Shipping Gazette - Daily Shipping News