Background

A company filed a case against another company and requested the court order them to pay 71971.177 Egyptian Pounds and 6% legal interest as compensation for the damage to a flour shipment. The company added another company, which had rented the ship, as a defendant in the case and requested the court order it to pay the amount along with the second company.

The court rejected the case.

The company appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court abandoned the appealed ruling and ruled the second company should pay the company the amount.

Decision

The second company appealed the ruling before the court of cassation and stated in its grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law because the court had established its ruling based on the expert's report and ignored its objections. The company stated it had maintained before the court that the customs document which confirmed the shortage in the shipment was insufficient to prove this shortage.