Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Journals Blogs -> Conflict of Laws
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal Journals
: Conflict of LawsUruguay - Case on Carrier?s Liability
By Gilles Cuniberti
I am grateful to Henry Saint Dahl, the President of the Inter-American Bar Foundation, for contributing this report on this case from Uruguay.
On October 10, 2008, the Civil Court of Appeals in Montevideo, Uruguay, affirmed the decision of the 14th Civil Court of Montevideo in Royal & Sun Alliance Seguros Uruguay Sociedad Anónima v. Panalpina, Pantainer Express Line holding that in a multimodal transportation contract between Guatemala and Montevideo, Guatemalan law exempted the carrier from liability when the carrier had followed instructions from the owner, which lead to the cargo being stolen from the place where it was left in custody.
The court applied Art. 2399 of the Uruguayan Civil Code and, as the most important conflict rule, Art. 34 (4) (b) of the 1889 Montevideo Civil International Law Treaty (Tratado sobre Derecho Internacional Civil de 1889), which states that
? contracts concerning things certain are ruled by the law of the place where they are situated at the time the contract is made ? if the effects of such contracts relate to a special place, those contracts are ruled by the law of such place.
The court held that the effect of the contract related to Guatemala, which made Guatemalan law applicable. In its turn, Art. 817 of the Guatemalan Commercial Code relieved the carrier from liability when the total or partial loss of the cargo resulted from ?an act or instructions given by the owner or his representative.? Interestingly, domestic Uruguayan law would have lead to the opposite result since it imposes strict liability on the carrier (obligación de resultado). The mere fact that the cargo did not arrive to its final destination would have made the carrier liable.
In support of the applicability of Guatemalan law, the judgment stressed that the relevant events (instructions given and cargo stolen) took place in Guatemala.
The text of the decision was provided by Uruguayan attorney Eduardo Lapenne.
Related posts:
- Article on choice of law for intra-Australian torts after the civil liability legislation Professor Martin Davies, co-author of the leading text on Australian...
- Symeonides: Choice of Law for Products Liability Symeon C. Symeonides, Dean of the College of Law at...
- Article on Rome II - Liability for Cross-Border Torts A very interesting article on Rome II written in German...
Full post as published by Conflict of Laws on February 05, 2009 (boomark / email).
Defective Furnaces
Carrier Corporation agrees to compensate consumers for high efficiency gas furnaces in class action settlement.
Dog Bites
alleging liability for personal injuries caused.
Car Accidents
alleging liability for personal injuries caused by car, truck, bus, motorcycle or other vehicle accidents.
California Car Accidents
alleging liability for personal injuries caused by car, truck, bus, motorcycle or other vehicle accidents.
Washington Car Accident
alleging liability for personal injuries caused by car, truck, bus, motorcycle or other vehicle accidents in Washington state.
Kansas City Car Accidents
alleging liability for personal injuries caused by a car accident in Kansas City, Missouri.

Uruguay Establishes Same-Sex Unions
Superior Court Holds D&O Insurer's Consent Was Required For Settlement
Common Carrier (Airplane/Bus) Liability
Uruguay: Church concerned over homosexual adoption
Insurance Limits for Georgia Trucking Companies Are Grossly Inadequate
Georgia and Atlanta Area Serious Injury Cases: Frequently Asked Question Number 9








