Court: Guangzhou Maritime Court (2024)
Facts: A Chaozhou ceramics factory (plaintiff, a Guangdong industry cluster enterprise) signed an export contract for ceramic tableware with a Russian company on CIF St. Petersburg terms, settled by L/C. The plaintiff booked space through a domestic forwarder, and the carrier issued a clean bill of lading. Upon arrival, the Russian buyer found broken tableware due to damaged packaging, refused payment, and applied to a local court to seize the goods. The plaintiff sued the carrier for 800,000 RMB in cargo damage, while the carrier blamed poor packaging.
Holding:
(1) CIF risk boundary: under CIF, the seller completes delivery when goods pass the ship's rail and risk transfers to the buyer, but the carrier bears the burden of proof for in-transit damage;
(2) Foreign evidence admissibility: the Russian buyer's inspection report, duly notarized and authenticated, was admissible but weighed against the clean B/L and packing list;
(3) Liability allocation: the court found partial damage from packaging defects (no shock-absorbing foam used) and partial from improper stowage, awarding the carrier 60% (480,000 RMB) and allocating 40% to the plaintiff.
Significance:
· Clarifies responsibility allocation among seller, buyer, and carrier under CIF, guiding fragile-goods exporters in ceramics and similar industries;
· Standardizes notarization and authentication of foreign evidence, addressing cross-border litigation evidence difficulties;
· Emphasizes packaging quality to avoid cargo damage disputes caused by the exporter's own defects.