Delivery delay and carriage obstacles

Article 19 CMR defines delay by reference to the agreed delivery time. If no time was agreed, the duration is assessed against what a diligent carrier could reasonably have required in the circumstances. For partial loads, the normal time needed to assemble a complete load is also relevant.

Section 429 of the Austrian Commercial Code likewise addresses damage caused by failure to meet the delivery time. The carrier is not liable under that rule where the delay resulted from circumstances that an ordinary carrier could not prevent. This is not a blanket release. The cause, foreseeability, available responses and actual care must be examined.

Article 14 CMR addresses a situation in which the carriage can no longer be performed according to the consignment note before the destination is reached. The carrier must generally request instructions from the person entitled to dispose of the goods. If a different performance is possible but instructions cannot be obtained in reasonable time, the carrier must take steps that reasonably protect that person’s interests.

If the problem arises at the delivery place, for example because the consignee refuses the goods or unloading is unavailable, Article 15 CMR becomes relevant. The consignor is involved. Article 16 CMR deals with costs, unloading and custody. For perishable goods or disproportionate storage costs, a sale may also be possible. The reason, communication and proportionality of the decision should be recorded carefully.

Late delivery does not automatically justify every claimed consequential loss. Under Article 23(5) CMR, the claimant must prove that the delay caused the loss. Compensation is generally limited to the amount of the carriage charge. A higher amount may be available where a special interest in delivery was validly declared under Article 26 CMR.

The issue is therefore not just the invoices. Causation must be shown. Did the loss result from the late delivery? Would it have occurred even with timely delivery? Could a reasonable substitute measure have reduced it? For perishable goods, production interruptions, contractual penalties or missed delivery windows, the factual sequence and contractual basis should be reviewed together.

The CMR liability check should be kept separate from the documentation of cargo damage. Loss or damage raises different evidence questions from a delay without physical damage.

An internal note about the delay is not enough. Article 30(3) CMR provides that compensation for delay is not payable unless a written reservation is sent within 21 days from the time the goods were placed at the disposal of the consignee. Proof of receipt should be retained.

The reservation should clearly identify the transport and the delay. It should include the consignment note number, agreed delivery time, actual time of availability, a short description of the loss and an express reservation of delay damages. The exact amount can follow if the reservation is timely and clear.

Apparent and concealed cargo damage follows different rules under Article 30 CMR. The inspection at delivery and the written notices for non-apparent damage should therefore not be confused with the reservation for delay.

In practice, the chronology often decides the case. Preserve the order, consignment note, delivery time, booked slot, tracking data and all messages between consignor, carrier, forwarder and consignee. For an obstacle, add photographs, official notices, accident records and the instruction that was given.

The loss calculation should explain each item and why it resulted from the delay or obstacle. This can include additional storage, transshipment, return transport, unproductive waiting time, replacement carriage or proven production consequences. A single unitemised total makes the assessment harder.

Use the shipment documents checklist for the initial collection. It does not replace legal advice, but it helps prevent the loss of essential timestamps and instructions.

Under Article 32 CMR, an action arising from carriage is generally subject to a one-year limitation period. The period is three years in cases of wilful misconduct or equivalent default. The starting point depends on the claim. For delay, it generally begins on the day of delivery. A written claim can suspend the period under the conditions of Article 32 CMR until the carrier rejects it in writing and returns the documents.

This is not a substitute for a deadline review. It must first be established whether the CMR applies, who is entitled to claim and whether a carrier, forwarder, consignor or consignee is involved in another legal capacity. Domestic carriage or special contractual terms may require a different analysis.

Contact us with the consignment note, transport order, first obstacle or delay notice and a short chronology. This makes it possible to identify quickly which instruction, reservation and next step matter most.