Shipping 2026

ARGENTINA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Jorge Radovich, Liza Pozzi and Matias Bongiorno, Radovich & Asociados

The revolution that the use of containers produced in cargo transport has forced jurisprudence to determine in which cases pieces packed in a container should be considered as a single package or not. The plenary ruling issued by the Federal Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals of Buenos Aires in La Confianza Cía. Arg. de Segs. S.A. v Buque Salvador y/o Ivaran Lines s/cobro , on 22 September 1989, established that “in the case of a claim for damages for breach of a maritime transport contract based on the shortage of goods packaged in bundles or other types of packages in containers – the quantity of which was indicated in the respective bill of lad - ing, either in the ‘number of bundles’ column or in the description of the goods – and packed in a cargo unit, the liability limit established by the 1924 Brus - sels Convention must be calculated for each of those bundles or containers”. This plenary ruling is binding on all Chambers of the Federal Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. Limitation of Liability of the Owner and Disponent Owner According to the ANL, the owner and disponent owner may limit their liability, including in cases not related to cargo claims, unless there is fault on their part in relation to the events giving rise to the claim. The limitation shall extend to the value of the vessel at the end of the voyage during which such events occurred, plus the gross freight, the passage received or receivable for that voyage, and the credits in its favour that arose during the voyage. Obviously, this limitation will be used in case of catastrophic claims. In addition to this limitation, the ANL provides for other limitations for specific contracts or situations, namely, with regard to shipwrecked or inactive vessels, naval craft and aircraft, and dangerous objects in the water, which may be extracted, removed or scrapped in cer - tain circumstances. As we explained in “Characteristics of the Ship-Own - er’s Liability” above, the source of liability in ANL dam - ages is always subjective, and limited. The ANL estab -

lishes exceptions to the limitation of liability, such as when the vessel is unseaworthy. There are also cases of objective liability, such as when pollution occurs. The owner and disponent owner may exercise the right to limit their liability to their creditors, in accord - ance with the provisions of the ANL until the deadline for filing objections in the enforcement proceedings, handed down in any of the proceedings in which they are sued for payment of any of the claims mentioned in the ANL. In the event that the vessel is abandoned: if in kind, this must be done within three months of the end of the expedition; if in value, within five days of being notified to comply with a final judgment. According to the ANL, If the limitation is insufficient to cover personal injury, it shall be increased by USD2,550 approximately per tonne of total tonnage until such damages are covered. Vessels under 100 tonnes: USD254,300 approximately. Argentina has not ratified the 1924 and 1957 Limita - tion of Liability Conventions or the 1996 Protocol. Assistance and Rescue of Vessels As we explained in the Introduction, in Argentina, maritime law rules also apply to navigation in brown waters. According to the ANL, for assistance and rescue (A&R) of vessels to take place, three conditions must be met: danger, lack of reasonable opposition from the Master of the assisted vessel, and the achievement of a use - ful result. Unlike English law, the peril does not need to be immi - nent, but it must be real (not putative). Regarding the Master’s lack of opposition, this does not have to be against the express will of the assisted vessel. The refusal must be reasonable. Finally, the A&R must have a useful outcome. When all three conditions are met, A&R allows the assisting vessel to claim a salary that will be deter -

51 CHAMBERS.COM