“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
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...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Istanbul University Press
2023-11-01
|
| Series: | Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/8AA47CFBD4E94063931E49780B313E3B |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0578-9745 2687-4113 |