A gas-powered turbine, the property of Topgen Srl (Topgen), was loaded at Kobe, Japan, on the M/V Lloydiana for carriage to the port of Genoa. The bill of lading was issued by Nippon Yusen Kaisha Ltd (NYK), the shipper being Schenker Ltd. This carriage by sea was supposed to be followed by road transport to the factory of Topgen in the north of Italy. Once the ship arrived in Genoa, the turbine was unloaded and stored in a warehouse belonging to CICE Spa (CICE). During the subsequent operations of loading it onto a truck, the turbine fell, resulting in damage. In January 1995, Intergen Srl (Intergen), incorporating Topgen, brought a claim in the Tribunal of Genoa against CICE, and Agenzia Marittima Clivio Srl (AMC, NYK's agent), claiming compensation for damages.

In July 2000, the Tribunal of Genoa ruled against NYK, within the limits of liability provided by the Brussels Convention 1924 (the Hague Rules), but rejected the claim against CICE. The decision was challenged by Intergen. In April 2002, the Court of Appeal of Genoa excluded the application of the limit of compensation enshrined in the Hague Rules, as the damage occurred after unloading operations and in the absence of any agreement by the parties to extend the scope of the Rules. In other respects, the Court confirmed the first instance judgment with regard to CICE.

AMC recurred to the Court of Cassation against Intergen and CICE (then incorporated as Nuova Immobiliare Spa), arguing that the movement of the turbine onto the truck fell within the scope of the Hague Rules, given that the operation in question was ancillary to the maritime transport route, and that the limitation of liability provided in the Hague Rules should therefore apply.

Held: The appeal in cassation is dismissed.

The Court of Cassation rejects AMC's application to apply the limitation of liability provided in art 4.5 of the Hague Rules. The Court defines the temporal scope of the Convention, considering not only the provisions of arts 1 and 2, but also art 3. Indeed, the Court notes that arts 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 include preparatory loading activities, and that art 3.6 considers as unloading operations not only the immediate delivery of the goods at the port of destination, but also further functional activities (such as storage in places belonging to the carrier within the port). However, the implementation of the Hague Rules for phases of road transport linked to the carriage of goods by sea is to be excluded, being road transport governed by the Civil Code, rather than the Hague Rules, in the absence of any agreement by the parties.