BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO DENMARK A/S AND OTHERS V KAZEMIER TRANSPORT BV

[2015] UKSC 65, United Kingdom Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption and Lord Reed, 28 October 2015

Carriage of goods by road - Effect of jurisdiction agreement - Carrier based in England having agreed exclusive English jurisdiction - Cargo interest also suing successive carriers to whom carriage had been delegated - Successive carriers - Relationship between Brussels I Regulation and international Conventions - Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road 1956 (CMR) - CMR, article 31.1(a), 31.1(b), 34, 36, 39 - Brussels Regulation (EC) No 44/2001

BAT was the cargo owner whose cargo of tobacco had allegedly been stolen during transport. The carrier, Exel, had agreed an exclusive English jurisdiction clause and had delegated the carriage to sub-carriers, or in CMR terminology "successive carriers". The sub-carriage contracts provided for English law and jurisdiction, but made no reference to Exel's contract with BAT. All contracts were subject to CMR and its jurisdiction provisions. Exel was unrepresented and the litigation was in practice between BAT and the successive carriers. It was common ground that BAT could sue the successive carriers; the question was whether they could be sued in England, or whether they had to be sued in Holland where they were present, or in the place where the goods had been taken over, or where they ought to have been delivered, which were different for each cargo. Cooke J at first instance ruled in favour of the defendants, a ruling reversed by the Court of Appeal which held that there was English jurisdiction over the claims against the successive carriers.