DENMARK Trends and Developments Contributed by: Johannes Grove Nielsen, Camilla Søgaard Hudson, Lars Rosenberg Overby and Malthe Hersom Kløft, Bech-Bruun
the carrier – unless the carrier is able to prove that the damage was not caused, in whole or in part, by any fault or negligence on the part of the carrier. Thus, as a first step, the claimant must prove that the damage occurred while under the custody of the car - rier. If the claimant is successful in this respect, the carrier is presumed liable for the damage. To escape liability, the carrier must in turn substantiate that the damage was not caused, in whole or in part, by any fault or negligence on the part of the carrier. The bill of lading normally serves as an important doc - ument in cargo claims, easing the burden of proof. However, the bill of lading will often not contain evi - dence as to the temperature of the cargo prior to load - ing. Thus, the claimant is frequently required to docu - ment that a temperature deviation occurred while the cargo was under the care of the carrier, often through reference to temperature logs, and that the tempera - ture deviation did not occur prior to loading and/or after unloading of the goods. Central points from the decisions rendered by the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court The above principles were applied by the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court in their decision of 18 August 2025 in a matter involving the transport of frozen fish from Iceland to France. The booking notes included text stipulating that the fish was dry, fresh and frozen at a temperature of -24 degrees Celsius. The recipient refused delivery of the fish, as the tem - perature was significantly higher than that indicated in the booking note. The court found that the claimant had not lifted its burden of proof in respect of the temperature devia - tion having occurred while under the care of the car - rier. The court noted that the claimant had not suf - ficiently proven that the frozen fish had been laden at -24 degrees Celsius, and deemed that the tem - peratures contained in the submitted temperature logs could not explain the increased temperature of the fish upon delivery. Consequently, the carrier was found not liable. Another notable decision was rendered by the Dan - ish Maritime and Commercial Court on 4 September
2025. The matter involved boxes of contrast medium, to be used for patient x-rays, which were to be trans - ported from Shanghai to Los Angeles. The boxes of contrast medium were found to be at a total loss upon delivery, as they had been subjected to lower tem - peratures than permissible for safe use of the medium. The waybill indicated that the contrast medium had to be transported at 21 degrees Celsius. The boxes of contrast medium were loaded in a container with two temperature loggers. It appeared from the logs of the temperature loggers that the temperature within the container used for transport had been maintained at between 0 and -6 degrees Celsius for long periods during transport. As the medium had been subject to temperatures outside the instructed temperature range for storage, the contrast medium was rendered unsafe for use. On the basis of the temperature excursions indi - cated by the temperature logs, the court found that the claimant had substantiated that the damage to the transported contrast medium must had occurred while under the care of the carrier. While the exact reason for the temperature excursions could not be determined, the carrier had not provided sufficient documentation showing that the temperature devia - tions had not been caused by their fault or negligence. Consequently, the carrier was found to be liable. This decision illustrates the difficulties that arise in connection with the burden of proof with regard to cargo damage resulting from temperature deviations. Thus, any requirements with regard to the transport of such cargo should be sufficiently described in the transport documents. Further, the shipper should take appropriate meas - ures to document the temperature of the cargo during loading – for example through the use of planted tem - perature loggers. Temperature readings taken after transport often do not provide sufficient evidence of whether the temperature deviation occurred during transport. The shipper will usually not be required to prove the cause of the temperature deviation. In such situations, the carrier will often have difficulties invoking liability exceptions, which at the outset would
234 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook