Quantum Corpn Inc v Plane Trucking Ltd

The CMR Convention applies to the international road leg of a mixed or multimodal carriage contract where the contract provides for or permits that road carriage and it actually occurs. The contract need not be characterised overall as predominantly one for carriage by road.

For article 1(1), the places of taking over and delivery are the beginning and end of the relevant road leg. An unexercised contractual option to substitute another mode of transport does not prevent CMR from applying. Nor does the absence of a CMR consignment note. Contractual limitations inconsistent with CMR are overridden, including where article 29 may remove the carrier’s right to limit liability for wilful default.

The appellants claimed for the loss of hard disks carried under an air waybill from Singapore to Dublin. The agreed transport comprised an air leg to Charles de Gaulle airport and a roll-on, roll-off road leg from Paris to Dublin. The goods were stolen during the road leg in North Wales.

On a Part 24 application, Tomlinson J held that the contract had to be characterised as a whole. Because it was predominantly for carriage by air, he concluded that the CMR Convention did not govern the road leg. He awarded the appellants £116,057.56 under Air France’s contractual limitation.

The central issue on appeal was whether article 1(1) of the CMR Convention could apply to the international road element of a mixed or multimodal contract. Any issue under article 29 concerning wilful default was reserved for the Commercial Court.

1. Appeal allowed unanimously. Lord Justice Mance delivered the judgment, with which Lord Justice Latham and Lord Justice Aldous agreed. The Paris-to-Dublin leg fell within article 1(1) of the CMR Convention.

2. A contract is “for” carriage by road when it provides for or permits international road carriage and that carriage actually occurs under its terms. The Convention’s application is not confined to an unconditional promise, made at the outset, to carry solely by road. An unexercised option to substitute another mode does not remove a road carriage contract from CMR. The court also favoured the view that CMR applies when a contract initially provides for another mode but permits the carrier to elect for road carriage.

3. A single contract may contain distinct contractual stages governed by different carriage regimes. CMR can apply to its international road leg without applying to the other legs. Article 1(1) does not require the court to characterise the contract overall as predominantly one for road carriage. Such an approach would produce arbitrary results, leave agreed international road carriage outside any convention and encourage artificial disputes about the essence of multimodal contracts.

4. For article 1(1), the place of taking over and the place designated for delivery may be read as the beginning and end of the contractually provided or permitted road leg. The Convention’s detailed provisions can operate by treating the carrier, where necessary, as occupying the position of consignor or consignee at the interfaces between modes.

5. The absence of a CMR consignment note did not prevent the Convention from applying. Article 4 expressly preserves the existence and validity of a qualifying contract despite the absence, irregularity or loss of such a note.

6. The air waybill recorded two contractual stages: carriage by air to Paris and carriage by road to Dublin. Air France’s unexercised power to substitute another mode did not alter that conclusion. Its contractual conditions were overridden to the extent that they limited liability inconsistently with CMR. The claimants could therefore seek to establish under article 29 that wilful default disentitled Air France from limiting liability. That issue was remitted to the Commercial Court.

1. Court of Appeal: The appeal was allowed unanimously. The court held that the international road leg was governed by the CMR Convention. The article 29 issue was remitted to the Commercial Court. Permission to appeal to the House of Lords was refused.

2. Commercial Court: Tomlinson J held that the contract had to be characterised as a whole and was predominantly for carriage by air. He held CMR inapplicable and entered judgment against Air France for £116,057.56 under its contractual limitation. No citation for that decision is stated.