Can the sender stop, recall or redirect an international air shipment to another person? Article 12 of the Montreal Convention explained.
Mag. Bernhard Brandauer, Austrian attorney-at-law
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte
Mag. Bernhard Brandauer assists with the legal assessment of transport contracts, cargo damage and freight claims.
For an international air shipment, the sender may request a return, a stop or delivery to another person while the right of disposal under Article 12 of the Montreal Convention still exists. The instruction must reach the contractual carrier. The sender must perform the obligations under the contract of carriage and bear the additional costs. This article explains which action can be requested and when the consignee takes the sender’s place.
A new delivery address alone does not automatically amend the contract of carriage. The decisive points are the scope of the Montreal Convention, the status of the carriage, delivery of the instruction and the relevant air waybill or cargo receipt.
Answer a few questions about your role, the carriage status and the action you want to request.
The role matters because the sender and consignee have different rights under the Montreal Convention.
Secure the air waybill or cargo receipt, the shipment number, the contract of carriage and the current location. Address the instruction to the contractual carrier and request written confirmation of receipt.
Check whether the shipment has arrived at the destination and whether the consignee could already exercise the right under Article 13 of the Montreal Convention. An earlier effective instruction or a refusal of acceptance can change the assessment.
Article 1(1) of the Montreal Convention covers the international carriage of passengers, baggage and cargo by aircraft for reward. Carriage without reward is included when it is performed by an air transport undertaking. The first question for a right of disposal is therefore whether the specific air carriage falls within the Convention.
Carriage is international when the place of departure and the place of destination are, by agreement, situated in the territories of two States Parties. It is also international when both are in the territory of one State Party and the parties have agreed a stopping place in another State, even if that State is not a State Party. Where several successive carriers perform the carriage, it may be treated as a single operation when the parties have regarded it as one carriage.
This article addresses the right of disposal in international air carriage. Pure road carriage follows its own rules. The article CMR consignment note: signature and reservations addresses that different carriage phase. A combined transport chain therefore requires an assessment of which contract of carriage governs the instruction. The page Cross-border carriage of goods explains the interfaces.
Article 12(1) of the Montreal Convention gives the sender a right of disposal over the air shipment. The sender may request that the cargo be returned at the place of departure or destination. During a stopping place the sender may request that the cargo be stopped. The sender may also request delivery at the destination or during carriage to a person other than the person originally designated.
A request for a new delivery address must be classified as one of these actions. A new address does not automatically change the destination. The sender should therefore state expressly whether the request concerns a return, a stop or delivery to a specifically named person.
The right of disposal exists only under the conditions in Article 12(1). The sender must perform the obligations under the contract of carriage. The instruction must not cause damage to the carrier or other consignors. The sender must reimburse the costs caused by the instruction.
The contractual carrier is the proper recipient for an instruction under Article 12. Article 42 makes clear that such an instruction is effective only when addressed to the contractual carrier. An actual performing carrier may have the shipment in its custody. Its mere knowledge does not replace effective delivery to the contractual carrier.
The message should therefore be sent to the party identified as carrier in the contract of carriage. The sender may also inform the performing carrier. For the legal effect of an Article 12 instruction, delivery to the contractual carrier remains decisive.
The distinction from freight forwarding matters. A freight forwarder may have its own obligations under a forwarding contract. That does not automatically change the position of the contractual carrier under the Montreal Convention. The page Freight forwarding and logistics contracts provides further context.
Before sending an instruction, the sender should have the contract of carriage and the air waybill or cargo receipt available. The documents should identify the shipment, the original consignee and the current carriage status. The shipment documents checklist supports this preparation.
Article 12(1) requires performance of the obligations under the contract of carriage. Depending on the contract, this can include due charges and cooperation for safe handling. The instruction must not interfere with the carrier’s operations or the interests of other consignors. Ask for the expected costs and confirm them in writing before execution.
The instruction should state the shipment number, requested timing, precise action and the name of the proposed recipient. For a stop or return, the sender should also state the current location of the shipment. A clear written statement makes it easier to prove the content and delivery of the instruction later.
Under Article 12(4), the sender’s right of disposal generally comes to an end when the consignee’s right under Article 13 arises. After the cargo has arrived at the destination, the consignee may demand delivery if the sender has not previously exercised the right of disposal. The consignee must pay the charges due and comply with the conditions of carriage.
The sender cannot therefore add an instruction indefinitely. The relevant question is whether the consignee has already acquired its own right. An earlier instruction remains relevant to the handling of the shipment when it was effectively delivered to the contractual carrier.
The sender’s right revives when the consignee refuses acceptance or cannot be reached. Any further instruction must still be addressed to the contractual carrier. A statement to a service provider that happens to be involved in the delivery is not enough for this purpose.
When the carrier cannot execute the sender’s instruction, Article 12(2) requires the carrier to inform the sender immediately. This can apply when the shipment has already moved so far that the requested action is no longer possible at the stated place.
The notice should state why execution is impossible, where the shipment is now and which options remain available. The sender can then decide whether to request another permissible action. An instruction that cannot be executed does not automatically amend the contract of carriage.
Damage or delay is subject to separate rules on documentation and written notice. The article Air cargo damaged or delayed addresses these issues separately.
Article 12(3) protects the lawful holder of the copy of the air waybill or cargo receipt delivered to the sender. If the carrier executes an instruction without requiring production of that copy, the carrier is liable to the lawful holder. This does not remove a possible recourse claim against the sender.
For the sender, this means that an instruction should be linked to the relevant document and a verifiable basis of authority. For the carrier, the provision means that execution without checking the copy creates a separate liability risk towards the lawful holder.
The rule answers a specific risk question. It is not a general assessment of carrier liability under the Montreal Convention. If damage has already occurred, evidence, time limits and the correct respondent should be examined separately. The page Preserving evidence after cargo damage gives practical guidance.
Article 15(2) generally preserves the rights of sender and consignee under Articles 12 to 14. Agreed deviations from those provisions must nevertheless be entered in the air waybill or cargo receipt. The document therefore has a distinct evidential and allocation function.
When an arrangement changes, the sender should ask for a clear entry in the air waybill or an equally traceable written confirmation. The entry should identify the shipment, the instruction and the time of the agreement.
An email exchange can help prove the communication. It should supplement the document record. Whether it is sufficient in a particular case depends on the wording of the message, the contract and the subsequent handling.
For a robust instruction, the sender should gather the air waybill or cargo receipt, the shipment number, the contract of carriage and the contact details of the contractual carrier. Add the requested action, the reason for the change and the details of the proposed recipient.
Send the instruction to the contractual carrier in a traceable way. Keep confirmation of receipt, approval of costs and the actual shipment status. If the carrier rejects the instruction or cannot be reached, record the time and content of the response.
Whether an instruction is still possible depends on the carriage status and the transfer of the consignee’s right. Where the cargo value is high, damage is imminent or authority is disputed, the specific transport file should be reviewed promptly.
Yes. Article 12(1) of the Montreal Convention generally allows a stop during a stopping place. The sender must perform the contractual obligations, must not cause damage and must pay the costs. The instruction must be addressed to the contractual carrier.
An address alone is not a sufficiently clear instruction. The sender should expressly request a return, a stop or delivery to another person. Whether the requested delivery is possible depends on the carriage status and the contract conditions.
For an instruction under Article 12, the contractual carrier is the decisive recipient. Informing the performing carrier may be useful in practice. It does not replace effective delivery to the contractual carrier.
Under Article 13, the consignee’s right generally arises when the cargo arrives at the destination. The sender’s right then ends under Article 12(4) if it has not been exercised earlier. It revives when the consignee refuses acceptance or cannot be reached.
If the carrier executes the instruction without requiring production of the copy of the air waybill or cargo receipt delivered to the sender, Article 12(3) can make the carrier liable to the lawful holder. Recourse against the sender remains possible.
Written notice and documentation for damaged or delayed air shipments.
The distinction between a forwarding order and an instruction in the transport process.
First orientation on the carrier’s responsibility for cargo damage.
A practical checklist for documents before the cargo is handed over.
Briefly describe the route, the parties and the event. We will discuss which documents and next review step may be useful.
Address
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg
Phone
+43 662 6280000