“Inherent Vice of the Goods” Exception in the frame of “Volcafe Ltd and Others v. Compania Sud Americana de Vapores SA” Decision: An Assessment under Turkish-German Law

Year 2023, Issue: 73, 121 - 133, 24.11.2023

Melda Taşkın

https://doi.org/10.26650/annales.2023.73.0003

Abstract

The United Kingdom Supreme Court, in “Volcafe Ltd and others (Appellants) v. Compania Sud Americana De Vapores SA” case set forth an important principle related to burden of proof for the exceptions of carrier’s liability counted in Art.IV/2 of the Hague Visby Rules and decided that “the carrier is under the obligation to substantiate the due diligence for the protection of the goods carried”. According to Art.1182 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC), titled “the Circumstancesbthat provide Presumption related to Causality and Absence of Negligence to the Carrier”, “damages arise from the inherent vice or characteristics of the goods” is accepted as an exception which facilitates the exclusion of the liability of the carrier. On the other hand, the German Commercial Code (HGB §499,3) includes a provision which states explicitly that “the carrier may avail itself of the defences related to the inherent characteristics of goods only if it has taken all of the measures in respect of the use of specific equipment”. This study aims to review the provisions in both Turkish and German Law related to the exception of “inherent vice of the goods” and making a remark taking into consideration of the United Kingdom Supreme Court’s decision.

Keywords

Volcafe Case, İnherent Vice of the Goods, Exceptions of Carrier’s Liability, Excepted Perils, Burden of Proof

References

• Akan P, Deniz Taşımacılığında Taşıyanın Yüke Özen Yükümlülüğünün İhlalinden Doğan Sorumluluğu (1st edn. 2007). google scholar
• Akıncı S, Deniz Hukuku: Navlun Mukaveleleri, (1st edn. İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Yayınları 1968). google scholar
• Boyd S, Burrows AS and Foxton D, Scrutton on Charterparties and Bills of Lading, (20th edn, Sweet&Maxwell 1996). google scholar
• Çağa T and Kender R, Deniz Ticareti Hukuku - II: Navlun Sözleşmeleri, (9th edn, On İki Levha 2009). google scholar
• Derrington SC, ‘Due Diligence, Causation and Article 4(2) of the Hague-Visby Rules’, 1997 (3) International Trade and Business Law Annual 175-186. google scholar
• Gramm H, Das neue Deutsche Seefrachtrecht nach den Haager Regeln (Gesetz vom 10 August 1937 - RGBl. I Seite 891), (1st edn, Verlag von E.S. Mittler & Sohn 1938). google scholar
• Herber R and Harm EM, Münchener Kommentar zum Handelsgesetzbuch: HGB - Band 7: Transportrecht, (5th edn, Verlag C.H. Beck 2023). google scholar
• Hoffmann A, Die Haftung des Verfrachters nach deutschem Seefrachtrecht, (1st edn, Neuwied 1996). google scholar
• Karan H, “The Carrier’s Liability For Breach of The Contract of Carriage of Goods by Sea Under Turkish Law” (2002) 33 J. Mar. L. & Com. 91-110. google scholar
• Katsivela M, ‘Overview of Ocean Carrier Liability Exceptions under the Rotterdam Rules and the Hague-Hague/Visby Rules’, (2010) 40(2) Revue Generale de Droit 413-466. google scholar
• Ogis S and Kafeero E, “Volcafe Case - Common Law vs.Visby Hague Rules: Is It One Versus Another?”, (2020) XVII (2) YUHFD 749-757. google scholar
• Ogis S, ‘Lahey Kuralları ve Volcafe Davası Türk Hukuku Açısından Bakış’, (2020) 15 (169) THD 1865-1868. google scholar
• Okay S, Deniz Ticareti Hukuku II: Navlun Mukaveleleri (1st edn. 1968). google scholar
• Oetker H and Paschke M, Handelsgesetzbuch Kommentar, (7th edn, C.H. Beck Verlag 2021). google scholar
• Prüssmann H and Rabe D, Seehandelsrecht: Fünftes Buch des Handelsgesetzbuches mit Nebenvorschriften und Internationalen Übereinkommen, (4th edn, Verlag C.H. Beck 2000). google scholar
• Puttfarken HJ, Seehandelsrecht, (1st edn, Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft 1997). google scholar
• Rabe D and Bahnsen U, Seehandelsrecht: Fünftes Buch des Handelsgesetzbuches mit Nebenvorschriften und Internationalen Übereinkommen, (5th edn, Verlag C.H. Beck 2018) § 512 Rn 46, Rn 29. google scholar
• Seven V, Taşıyanın Yüke Özen Borcunun İhlalinden (Yük Zıya ve Hasarından) Doğan Sorumluluğu (1st edn. 2003). google scholar
• Treitel GH and Reynolds F, Carver on Bills of Lading, (3rd edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2011). google scholar
• Ülgener F, Taşıyanın Sorumsuzluk Halleri, (1st edn. Der 1991). google scholar
• Yazıcıoğlu E, Kender - Çetingil Deniz Ticareti Hukuku, (17th edn, Filiz Kitabevi 2022). google scholar
• Yetiş Şamlı K, 6102 sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu’na Göre Taşıyanın Zıya, Hasar ve Geç Teslimden Sorumluluğu, (1st edn. On İki Levha 2013). google scholar
• OLG Hamburg, Urteil vom 26.11.1987 (6 U 158/87 (Vorinstanz: LG Hamburg - 25 O 22/87), Transportrecht (1988) 238-239 google scholar
• BGH, Urteil vom 8. 12. 1975 - II ZR 64/74 (Köln), f Angemessene Berücksichtigung der Interessen der künftigen Vertragspartner in AGB, (1976) (15) Neue Juristiche Wochenschrift 672. google scholar
• “Volcafe Ltd. and others (Appellants) v. Compania Sud Americana De Vapores SA, [2018] UKSC 61 (Volcafe Ltd and others v. Compania Sud Americana De Vapores SA). <https://www. supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0219.html> accessed 14 February 2023. google scholar
• Albacora SRL v Westcott & Laurence Line Ltd [1966] UKHL J0622-2, To see full text, www.i-law.com/ilaw/doc/view.htm?id=145948> accessed 24 February 2023. google scholar