THE CARRIER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES TO ITS CARGO CAUSED BY AN UNAVOIDABLE CATASTROPHE.

The Plaintiff transported heavy goods on the Defendant’s vessel based on Bill of Lading No. One (1), however the Plaintiff’s goods transported by the Defendant were damaged resulting in loss as recorded in Certificate of Loss and Damage Survey No. 276044. The Defendant argued that the damage to the Plaintiff’s goods was due to strong winds during the voyage.

In the District Court and High Court the Plaintiff’s claim was rejected, and at the Cassation level the Supreme Court held that the Plaintiff’s objection could not be justified because the Judex Facti did not misapply the law because the Carrier could not be charged with compensation for damage to the goods/cargo caused by a catastrophe at sea that the Carrier could not avoid.

Source:
Supreme Court Decision No. 363 K/Pdt/1984, dated July 30, 1985.
https://jdihn.go.id/files/1276/Yurisprudensi-Mahkamah-Agung-RI-No-363K-PDT-1984-Tahun-1985.pdf

Salam Pancasila,
Fredrik J. Pinakunary