HiHonor lawyers recently acting on behalf of good Carrier client (Defendant) , successfully defensed Reefer Container cargo claims, cargo suit was finally withdrawn by Plaintiff.

Key Issues summarized by Court：

Q1: based on which Bs/L voyage to file the subject Lawsuit, the export voyage or return voyage?

A: Plaintiff confirmed that it was based on Export voyage, from Qingdao to Nagoya to file the cargo claims, for it was during the export voyage that cargo suffered damage during carrier’s control and responsibility period.

Q2: The Court opines that Container Temperature was key issue/evidence of the case, thus inviting parties to explain/debate on this issue.

A: both plaintiff and 3rd party (cargo forwarder) rejected/did not recognize the genuineness/objectivity of the Defendant Evidence 3- Container Temperature Record.

Plaintiff argued that the records were either not complete or not in good order, does not make sense.

On behalf of Defendant Carrier, we explained/argued that-

In order to save costs, plaintiff did not use truck with electricity equipment, container was powered-off during road transport to Qingdao CY; when cargo was stuffed on 06th Aug. 2020, it was hot summer raining day, not suitable for cargo stuffing; cargo were packed with small packages of plastic bags plus carton, difficult for stuffed cargo to breathe; container was tightly loaded with cargo of 25tons gross weight. All these factors likely contributed to cargo damages, for which the carrier should not be responsible.

It was obviously from both Plaintiff and the 3rd party Cargo Forwarder’s statements during hearing that, cargo was hot-stuffing,  which was in breach of the LOI / Letter of Indemnity for hot-stuffed cargo, as per reverse side of the LOI Notice, - clause 6 and 9, plaintiff should arrange pre-cooling both container and cargo before cargo-stuffing into containers, while the plaintiff and 3rd party’s statements during the court hearing proved vice versa, cargo was actually hot-loading/stuffed in hot summer rainy weather, followed by alleged freezing laden container to Bs/L set temperature, but lack of any supporting evidence.

Time difference: There seems time difference of 8 hours between Container Sensor and Event report/ Temperature Record (using GMT) and  Container Tracking record (using Local Time), which may cause mis-understanding on time/period therefrom.

After explanation via telecom, video display of Temperature Records, WECHAT etc. exchange info/ article with cargo side, via able taking lead by wise judge, the Plaintiff finally applied to court for Withdrawal of the Lawsuit/Claims.  Accordingly, QMC court issued Civil Ruling for approval the Withdrawal of Claims on 23.03.2021, court fee should be borne by cargo side.

Appreciation be given to professional honorable Justice, who guided evidence-exchange in good manner and issued court order approving Withdrawal of the cargo suit soonest.