CMR part load in groupage transport: quantity shortfall and damage calculation

In a part load carried in groupage transport, a quantity discrepancy must be tied to the individual shipment. The order, CMR consignment note, handovers and condition at delivery are relevant. Only when the shortfall is established can a possible loss be calculated under the applicable carriage law.

Groupage transport combines several shipments on one journey. That makes clear identification of packages, weight and handover especially important. A difference in the total load does not by itself prove that the particular part load was lost.

This article deals with quantity discrepancies and damage calculation for a part load in international carriage by road. Complete loss of a shipment, packaging defects and delay claims are addressed only to distinguish them.

Article 1 CMR covers carriage by road for reward between two different countries when the Convention’s further requirements are met. A part load remains an individual shipment within a larger groupage transport. The places of departure and destination and the contract of carriage determine the classification.

Article 4 CMR does not make the contract of carriage dependent on a properly completed consignment note. The CMR consignment note remains important for describing the goods and the route. If particulars are missing or inconsistent, the shipment must be identified with the other records.

The overview on CMR and the transport contract explains the international framework. This article focuses on a quantity discrepancy within one part load.

Each part load should be identified by packages, marks, type of goods and weight. Section 426 UGB lists, among other things, the description of the goods, quantity, weight and delivery location as consignment-note particulars. In groupage transport, these details must be assigned to the individual shipment.

Section 427 UGB concerns supporting documents and the consequences of missing or incorrect papers. A packing list, delivery note or electronic scan does not replace every consignment-note entry, but it can supplement the identification. Contradictions between records should be clarified promptly.

At every handover, the parties should record quantity and condition. A collective confirmation for the whole journey leaves the affected part load unclear. The article on signatures and reservations explains how specific discrepancies can be recorded.

A difference found at destination does not yet show when it arose. The part load may have been complete at taking-over, damaged during a transhipment or incomplete at delivery. The last complete handover must therefore be compared with the first incomplete record.

Article 17 CMR links the carrier’s liability to the period between taking-over and delivery. For a part load, it is therefore necessary to identify which carrier had custody of the affected shipment and which circumstances could explain the loss or damage.

Tracking data alone does not prove the inventory. It becomes useful together with scans, seals, photographs, handover records and reservations. The cargo damage documentation checklist supports chronological preservation of the evidence.

Once the missing quantity is established, the value of the affected goods must be determined. Article 23 CMR links compensation for loss in principle to the value of the goods at the place and time when they were taken over. In a partial loss, the calculation concerns the missing or affected goods. Value, weight and quantity must therefore match the file.

Article 23 CMR also contains rules on certain costs and limits the compensation. Whether customs, carriage charges or further costs are included depends on the provision’s requirements and the particular loss. A blanket calculation based on the value of the entire groupage load is insufficient.

Delay requires a different assessment from loss. Article 23(5) CMR requires proof of damage caused by delay and generally limits compensation to the carriage charges. The CMR liability check can help organise the initial loss data.

Article 30 CMR addresses reservations for apparent loss or damage. At delivery, the consignee should record the specific shortfall with package, mark and visible condition. A general reservation leaves its scope unclear.

Non-apparent damage raises separate notice questions. The time of discovery, the content of the notice and its receipt by the carrier are relevant. The transport file should therefore contain the first finding as well as the later complaint.

The absence of a reservation does not by itself decide the entire claim. It may make the evidence more difficult. The delivery record, consignment note, photographs, notice and carrier response should be assessed together.

Groupage describes the organisation of several shipments on one journey. It does not by itself identify the contracting party for each part load. The customer, forwarder, contractual carrier and performing carrier may have different roles.

For each part load, the order, consignment note and handovers should identify the same contract and shipment. If another carrier is engaged, the contractual party’s external liability must be kept separate from any internal recourse. The contract chain must be assessed from the records.

The article on successive carriers deals with the specific recourse regime. This article concerns quantity and loss assessment for the part load.

Before taking-over, the shipper should identify the part load by packages, marks and weight in the order and packing list. The carrier should check whether the consignment note matches the shipment received. Discrepancies belong in the transport file.

At transhipment, record place, time, quantity, seals and condition. At delivery, the consignee should count the part load and have a visible difference entered specifically. If packages are opened later, record the opening, contents and discovery of the shortfall.

After the journey, prepare a quantity overview. It should connect the agreed quantity, taking-over, each handover, delivery, shortfall, weight, goods value and supporting record. That overview supports separate assessment of liability, amount and objections.

A common mistake is using one total for several part loads. That leaves unclear which shipper handed over which quantity. Separate markings, package numbers and a record for each handover provide a clearer basis.

A total value for the groupage load also makes calculation difficult. In a partial loss, the affected goods, their value and their weight must be identified separately. An invoice for the entire load does not replace that assignment.

Companies should not limit a complaint to a statement such as “goods missing”. The notice should identify shipment, package, quantity, time of discovery and available records. This gives the carrier a workable basis for checking the facts.

Preserve the transport order, CMR consignment note, packing list, delivery note and delivery record. Add taking-over and transhipment records, scans, tracking data, photographs, seal details, complaints and communication with the companies involved.

Then arrange the figures: agreed packages, quantity taken over, confirmed handovers, delivered quantity, shortfall, weight and goods value. Each figure should be linked to a specific record. With several consignees, keep one overview per delivery location.

The transport route, contractual relationships, reservations and time of notice also matter. If the shortfall or amount is disputed, the complete transport file should be reviewed.