cmr-grenzueberschreitender-transport

/transportrecht:cmr-grenzueberschreitender-transport

Purpose

The skill examines the liability of the carrier in cross-border road transport under the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR, BGBl. 1961 II p. 1119), which applies in Germany as directly applicable federal law and takes precedence over the HGB freight law within its scope of application. It addresses the scope of application, consignment note, liability for goods in custody, exclusions of liability, the maximum amount of 8.33 SDR/kg identical to § 431 HGB, qualified fault, notice of damage, jurisdiction and limitation.

Inputs

Route of carriage (place of dispatch and place of delivery – at least one in a Contracting State of the CMR, at least one state border crossed)
Consignor, carrier (if applicable sub-carrier Art. 34 et seq. CMR), consignee
Consignment note details (CMR consignment note? reservations? declaration of value Art. 24 / interest Art. 26?)
Time of handover and delivery
Goods: type, packaging, gross weight (kg), value of goods
Nature of damage (total/partial loss, damage, exceeding the delivery period), damaging event
Date and form of the consignee's notice of damage
Position of the client: consignor, consignee, carrier/sub-carrier, transport insurer

Sub-agent architecture

Researcher provides CMR statute, BGH I. Civil Senate and OLG case law on Art. 17, Art. 23, Art. 29 and Art. 32 as well as commentary references (Thume, Beck'scher CMR-Handkommentar, Koller). Drafter examines in the style of a legal opinion the scope of application Art. 1 CMR, liability Art. 17 et seq., calculates the maximum amount according to 8.33 SDR/kg gross weight and presents a deadline calendar (Art. 30, Art. 32) as well as choice of jurisdiction (Art. 31). Reviewer checks the time limit Art. 30 CMR, limitation Art. 32 CMR with start and end date and SDR daily rate with date.

Procedure

1. Scope of application Art. 1 CMR

Art. 1(1) CMR: The Convention applies to every contract for the for reward carriage of goods by road in vehicles, when the place of taking over the goods and the place designated for delivery, as specified in the contract, are situated in two different countries , of which at least one is a Contracting State .

Consequences:

CMR is mandatory law within its scope of application (Art. 41 CMR – agreements derogating to the detriment of the persons entitled are null and void).
CMR takes precedence over the HGB, insofar as the scope of application is opened; the HGB freight law (§§ 407 et seq.) is to be applied only subsidiarily insofar as the CMR leaves gaps.
Multimodal transport: Art. 2 CMR – piggyback carriage; supplementarily § 452 HGB for unknown place of damage.

2. Consignment note Art. 4–9 CMR

[Art. 4 CMR] The consignment note serves as evidence. Its absence or defects do not affect the validity of the CMR.
[Art. 6 CMR] Mandatory particulars (consignor, carrier, consignee, place and date of taking over, intended place of delivery, description of the goods, number of packages, weight).
[Art. 9 CMR] Rules of evidence: The consignment note creates presumptions as to the conclusion and content of the contract of carriage and as to the taking over of the goods by the carrier until proof to the contrary. Without reservation in the consignment note, the presumption applies that the goods and packaging were externally in good condition on taking over and that the particulars as to number, marks and numbers are correct (Art. 9(2) CMR).

3. Liability Art. 17 CMR

Art. 17(1) CMR: The carrier is liable for total or partial loss and for damage to the goods, provided that the loss or damage occurs between taking over and delivery, as well as for exceeding the delivery period.

Custodial liability like § 425 HGB – no fault required in the elements of the offence.

4. Exemptions from liability Art. 17 II–IV CMR / Burden of proof Art. 18 CMR

Art. 17(2) CMR (general grounds for exemption – burden of proof on the carrier):

Fault of the person entitled to dispose
instructions of the person entitled to dispose not caused by fault of the carrier
special defects of the goods
circumstances which the carrier could not avoid and the consequences of which he could not prevent (similar to force majeure, strict standard)

Art. 17(4) CMR – special risks (presumption under Art. 18(2) CMR):

a) use of open vehicles not provided with sheeting where expressly agreed in the consignment note b) absence or defects of packaging c) handling, loading, stowing or unloading by the consignor/consignee d) natural nature of certain goods (breakage, rust, internal deterioration, shrinkage, vermin, rodents) e) insufficient or incorrect description or numbering of the packages f) carriage of live animals

Art. 18 CMR governs the distribution of the burden of proof – in principle it falls on the carrier, with relief via the prima facie presumption in the case of Art. 17 IV risks.

5. Scope of liability Art. 23 CMR

[Art. 23 CMR]:

Para. 1: Compensation in value – value at the place and on the day of taking over.
Para. 2: The stock exchange, market or ordinary value is decisive.
Para. 3: Maximum amount = 8.33 units of account per kilogram of the gross weight lost. Unit of account = special drawing right (Art. 23(7) CMR as amended by the 1978 Protocol, BGBl. 1980 II p. 721).
Para. 4: Freight, customs duties and other costs incurred in connection with the carriage are to be reimbursed in full.
Para. 5: Exceeding the delivery period – liability limited to the freight.

Calculation identical to § 431 HGB:

Höchstbetrag (SZR) = 8,33 × Bruttogewicht der verlorenen/beschädigten Sendung (kg)
EUR-Wert           = Höchstbetrag × SZR/EUR-Tageskurs (IWF, Tag der Regulierung)

SDR daily rate: https://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/rms_five.aspx [unverifiziert – Tageskurs prüfen].

6. Declaration of value and interest in delivery (Art. 24, 26 CMR)

[Art. 24 CMR] The sender may, against a surcharge, declare in the consignment note a value of the goods exceeding the maximum amount – that amount is then the limit of liability.
[Art. 26 CMR] The sender may, against a surcharge, declare a special interest in delivery – then, in addition to the maximum amount, compensation for the proven loss may be claimed up to the amount declared.

7. Removal of the limitations of liability Art. 29 CMR

[Art. 29(1) CMR]: The carrier may not rely on the limitations of liability not if he caused the loss intentionally or by fault attributable to him which, under the law of the court seised, is equivalent to intent.

According to BGH case law on § 435 HGB, fault equivalent under the German standard corresponds to recklessness + awareness of the probable occurrence of loss. There is thus practical parallelism between HGB and CMR. BGH (I. ZS), judgment of 13.12.2012 – I ZR 236/11, TranspR 2013, 175.

Art. 29(2) CMR extends the consequence to servants and agents.

Consequences:

full liability without the 8.33 SDR limit
3-year limitation period (Art. 32 I 2 CMR)
the obligation to give notice of loss under Art. 30 CMR with consequences for the burden of proof remains in principle relevant (controversial)

8. Notice of loss Art. 30 CMR

[Art. 30 CMR]:

Loss	Notice period	Consequence of failure
Externally apparent	upon receipt (Art. 30 I 1 CMR)	presumption of proper delivery
Not externally apparent	within 7 days after delivery (excluding Sundays and public holidays), in writing (Art. 30 I 2 CMR)	ibid.
Exceeding the delivery period	within 21 days after handover to the consignee, in writing (Art. 30 III CMR)	exclusion of claim (controversial – controversial scope)

Art. 30(4) CMR: In calculating the period, the day of delivery or ascertainment is not counted.

9. Jurisdiction Art. 31 CMR

[Art. 31(1) CMR] – choice of the claimant among several places of jurisdiction:

a) courts of a State to which the parties have submitted by agreement b) court at the place of the habitual residence of the defendant, the principal place of business, the branch or agency through which the contract was concluded c) court of the place of taking over of the goods or of the place intended for delivery

Art. 31(2) CMR: Lis pendens- bar to parallel proceedings (lis pendens, identical to the Brussels Ia mechanism).

10. Limitation Art. 32 CMR

[Art. 32 CMR]:

Fault	Period	Commencement
Standard case	1 year	Art. 32 I CMR: damage/delivery period – delivery; total loss – 30 days after the agreed delivery period or 60 days after taking over; other cases – 3 months after conclusion of the contract
Intent / equivalent fault Art. 29	3 years	ditto

Art. 32(2) CMR: Suspension by written claim until written rejection; the claim only suspends insofar as the carrier replies in writing.

Art. 32(3) CMR: Otherwise, the law of the court seised governs suspension and interruption – thus in Germany §§ 203 et seqq. BGB.

11. Relationship CMR / HGB

Within the scope of application of the CMR: priority of application of the CMR over §§ 407 et seqq. HGB.
Domestic carriage: HGB.
Multimodal carriage with unknown place of damage: § 452 HGB.

Sources and citation style

Binding: ../../../references/zitierweise.md.

Convention and statutes

CMR (Convention of 19.05.1956 on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road) – BGBl. 1961 II p. 1119; Protocol of 05.07.1978 (SDR conversion) – BGBl. 1980 II p. 721. Full text (French/English original): https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=08000002800c87fb
§ 452 HGB (multimodal transport)
§§ 407 et seqq. HGB (subsidiary)
SDR daily rate: https://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/rms_five.aspx

Commentaries

Thume, CMR-Kommentar, 3rd ed. 2013, Art. 1 marginal no. 1 et seqq.; Art. 17 marginal no. 1 et seqq.; Art. 23 marginal no. 1 et seqq.; Art. 29 marginal no. 1 et seqq.; Art. 30 marginal no. 1 et seqq.; Art. 32 marginal no. 1 et seqq. [unverifiziert – Auflagenstand prüfen]
Boesche / de la Motte / Hartenstein, Beck'scher CMR-Handkommentar, most recent edition, Art. 17, 23, 29, 30, 32 CMR [unverifiziert – Auflagenstand prüfen]
Koller, Transportrecht, 10th ed. 2020, CMR part, Art. 1, 17, 23, 29, 30, 32 CMR [unverifiziert]

Case law (`[unverifiziert – prüfen in juris/TranspR]`)

BGH, judgment of 13.12.2012 – I ZR 236/11, TranspR 2013, 175 (Art. 29 CMR – qualified fault, parallel to § 435 HGB)
BGH, judgment of 30.09.2010 – I ZR 39/09, TranspR 2011, 218 (Art. 17, 18 CMR – burden of proof)
BGH, judgment of 03.03.2005 – I ZR 134/02, TranspR 2005, 311 (Art. 32 CMR – suspension by claim)
OLG Düsseldorf, judgment of 22.06.2011 – I-18 U 31/11, TranspR 2011, 421 (Art. 31 CMR – choice of jurisdiction)

Output format

GUTACHTEN – CMR-Frachtführerhaftung
Beförderung: <Versender (Staat A) → Empfänger (Staat B)>, <Datum Übernahme>, <Datum Ablieferung>
Gut: <Art>, Bruttogewicht <kg>, Warenwert <EUR>
Schaden: <Verlust / Beschädigung / Verspätung>, <EUR>

I. Sachverhalt
II. Frage(n)
III. Kurzantwort
     – Anwendbarkeit CMR Art. 1: [ja / nein]
     – Haftung Art. 17 CMR dem Grunde nach: [ja / nein]
     – Höchstbetrag (8,33 SZR × kg) Art. 23 III CMR: <SZR>; EUR-Gegenwert zum <Datum>
       Tageskurs SZR/EUR <Quelle, Datum>
     – Durchbruch Art. 29 CMR: [vorliegend / fernliegend]
     – Tatfrist Art. 30 CMR: [gewahrt / versäumt am <Datum>]
     – Verjährung Art. 32 CMR: läuft ab am <Datum>
     – Gerichtsstand Art. 31 CMR: <Wahlmöglichkeiten>
     – Empfehlung: <…>

IV. Rechtliche Bewertung
    1. Anwendungsbereich Art. 1 CMR
       – grenzüberschreitend? entgeltlich? Straße? Vertragsstaat?
    2. Frachtbrief und Beweisregeln Art. 4–9 CMR
    3. Haftung Art. 17 I CMR
    4. Haftungsausschlüsse Art. 17 II, IV CMR – Beweislast Art. 18 CMR
    5. Haftungsumfang Art. 23 I–IV CMR
       Berechnung: 8,33 SZR × <kg> = <SZR>
                   × Tageskurs SZR/EUR <Datum> = <EUR>
       Wertangabe Art. 24 / Interesse Art. 26 CMR?
    6. Durchbruch Art. 29 CMR
       a) Vorsatz?
       b) Gleichgestelltes Verschulden (Leichtfertigkeit + Bewusstsein)?
    7. Schadensanzeige Art. 30 CMR
       – sichtbar / verborgen (7 Tage) / Verspätung (21 Tage)?
       – Anzeigedatum: <Datum>; Frist gewahrt: [ja / nein]
    8. Gerichtsstand Art. 31 CMR
    9. Verjährung Art. 32 CMR
       – Regel- oder 3-Jahres-Frist?
       – Beginn: <Datum>; Ablauf: <Datum>
       – Hemmung Art. 32 II CMR / § 203 BGB?
    10. Verhältnis zu HGB – ggf. § 452 HGB bei Multimodal

V. Gesamtergebnis

VI. Risiken / offene Punkte
    🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 <Einstufung mit Begründung>
    – Offene Tatsachen: Bruttogewicht, Frachtbriefvermerke, Schadensanzeigedatum,
      Schnittstellenprotokoll Unterfrachtführer

VII. Quellenverzeichnis
     – CMR (BGBl.-Fundstellen)
     – Rspr. (BGH I ZR …, OLG …) [unverifiziert – prüfen]
     – Kommentare (Thume, Beck'scher CMR, Koller)
     – SZR-Tageskurs IWF, abgerufen am <Datum>

Example (extract, legal opinion style)

"The contract of carriage between V (Lyon, FR) and F (freight forwarding company, FR) for delivery to Stuttgart (DE) falls within the scope of application of the Convention under Art. 1(1) CMR: paid road carriage by truck, place of taking over and place of delivery in two different states, both (FR and DE) are contracting states.

Under Art. 17(1) CMR, F is liable in principle for the water ingress during the period of custody. A ground for exemption under Art. 17(2) CMR (unavoidable event) must be substantiated and proved (Art. 18(1) CMR); a mere reference to 'weather' is not sufficient – cf. BGH (I. ZS), judgment of 30.09.2010 – I ZR 39/09.

The maximum amount under Art. 23(3) CMR is 8.33 SDR/kg of the missing or damaged gross weight. For a gross weight of the twelve damaged cartons of an assumed 320 kg, this gives 2,665.6 SDR, to be converted using the SDR/EUR daily rate on the day of settlement (IMF, https://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/rms_five.aspx, as at ) [unverifiziert – Tageskurs prüfen].

The consignee's notice of damage two days after delivery is timely under Art. 30(1) sentence 2 CMR – the 7-day period (excluding Sundays and public holidays) is observed. The limitation period runs under Art. 32(1) sentence 1 CMR for one year from delivery; it can be suspended under Art. 32(2) CMR by written complaint.

The plaintiff may, under Art. 31(1) CMR, bring an action before the French courts (seat of the defendant/place of taking over) or the German courts (place of delivery Stuttgart). ..."

Risks / typical mistakes

Scope of application of Art. 1 CMR overlooked – domestic carriage with occasional border crossing does not fall within the scope of application if the contract is purely domestic in nature.
Fixed EUR value for 8.33 SDR without a date – the daily rate must be stated.
Applying Art. 29 CMR to German standards without indication – "equivalent fault" is a reference to the law of the court seised; in Germany this is the § 435 HGB line.
Art. 30 CMR periods and Art. 32 CMR periods confused – factual period Art. 30 ≠ limitation period Art. 32.
Art. 31 CMR jurisdiction understood as imposing a ranking – plaintiff's choice, no priority for the defendant's seat.
HGB §§ 425 et seq. applied in parallel with the CMR – the CMR takes precedence in application; the HGB applies only subsidiarily.
Declaration of value / increased interest overlooked (Art. 24, 26 CMR) if the consignment note contains them.
Suspension by written complaint Art. 32 II CMR misunderstood – it suspends only until written rejection.