Difference between revisions of "Carriage of Goods"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | DMC/SandT/ | + | DMC/SandT/10/02 |
| + | |||
| + | '''German Federal Supreme Court''' | ||
| + | Date of Judgement: 18 June 2009: Case Reference: 1 ZR 140/06 | ||
| + | '''CARRIER’S LIABILITY: BREAKING THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: SUB-CONTRACTING''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | DMC/SandT/10/01 | ||
'''Nile Dutch Africa Line B.V, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“NDAL”) v. (1) Delta Lloyd Schadeverzekering N.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“Delta Lloyd”), (2) Premium Tobacco Investments N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands (“Tobacco”), (3) M. Meerapfel Söhne A.G., Basel, Switzerland (“Meerapfel”) and (4) CETAC, Douala, Cameroon (“Cetac”) - [[The “NDS Provider”]] - | '''Nile Dutch Africa Line B.V, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“NDAL”) v. (1) Delta Lloyd Schadeverzekering N.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“Delta Lloyd”), (2) Premium Tobacco Investments N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands (“Tobacco”), (3) M. Meerapfel Söhne A.G., Basel, Switzerland (“Meerapfel”) and (4) CETAC, Douala, Cameroon (“Cetac”) - [[The “NDS Provider”]] - | ||
Revision as of 21:14, 14 February 2010
DMC/SandT/10/02
German Federal Supreme Court Date of Judgement: 18 June 2009: Case Reference: 1 ZR 140/06 CARRIER’S LIABILITY: BREAKING THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: SUB-CONTRACTING
DMC/SandT/10/01
Nile Dutch Africa Line B.V, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“NDAL”) v. (1) Delta Lloyd Schadeverzekering N.V., Rotterdam, the Netherlands (“Delta Lloyd”), (2) Premium Tobacco Investments N.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands (“Tobacco”), (3) M. Meerapfel Söhne A.G., Basel, Switzerland (“Meerapfel”) and (4) CETAC, Douala, Cameroon (“Cetac”) - The “NDS Provider” - Dutch Supreme Court
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA UNDER BILL OF LADING: HAGUE VISBY RULES: LIABILITY FOR DEFECTIVE CONTAINERS SUPPLIED BY CARRIER: PACKAGING OR PART OF THE VESSEL? INTERPRETATION OF TREATIES UNDER DUTCH LAW
