DCC 150/2004
Type
Case
Court
Dubai Court of Cassation
Jurisdiction
Dubai
Taxonomy
Civil Courts, Litigation Procedure & Practice, Admiralty, Shipping & Navigation
Copyright
LexisNexis
Decision date
28 Nov 2004
Catchwords
Contested judgment – Dismissing the plea – Maritime shipping contract – Lapse of time – Papers and correspondence – Agreement – Extend – Reasonable – Provisions of law – Maritime carrier – Responsible – Deterioration – Authority – Trial Court – Shipper – Consignee – Evidence – Expert report – Damage – Dysfunction – Refrigerated container
The contested judgment of dismissing the plea of not hearing the action arising from the maritime shipping contract because of the lapse of time, based on the papers and the correspondence proving the agreement between the parties to extend the term, is deemed reasonable and applicable to the provisions of law. The maritime carrier is deemed responsible of the goods unless he can prove that neither he nor his subordinates are responsible for the deterioration. The authority of the trial court to decide that such loss or damage or lack was caused by the carrier, one of his subordinates, or the shipper or consignee's action, on the evidence, documents and expert reports. The contested judgment which named the maritime carrier responsible for the damage to the mango fruit, based on the expert report which indicated a dysfunction and imbalance in the refrigerated container, is deemed reasonable and can be proved in documents presented to the court.
Having reviewed the case documents, read out the summary report prepared by the Honorable “………” Judge, heard the pleading, and after the legal deliberation;
Whereas the cassation has fulfilled the requirements prescribed by law in terms of form;