ACE European Group Ltd, the respondent insurer, filed a claim for damage to two containers of frozen fish transported from Agadir, Morocco, to Valencia, Spain, by the appellant carrier, Boluda Lines SA, on the Elisa B. The damage consisted of deterioration of the frozen fish, caused by a failure in the cold chain that occurred while the containers were deposited at the facilities of Terminal de Contenedores de Alicante SA (the terminal) at the port of destination. The terminal was sued as the depositary of the cargo. The appellant carrier was sued as jointly and severally liable for the cargo damage, despite the fact that the damage had occurred after the cargo had been unloaded from the ship and deposited with the terminal. The respondent insurer alleged that the appellant carrier was obligated to do what was relevant once the cargo had passed the border sanitary controls in the port.

The insurer's claim was dismissed in the first instance, since the Court concluded that its action had prescribed. The appellate Court, however, upheld the insurer's appeal, on the basis that the carrier assumed, in addition to transport, the passage of the cargo through border inspection for the purposes of the timely sanitary control of the cargo. The carrier appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the appellate Court's decision infringed arts 1 and 17 of the Law of 22 December 1949 on maritime transport of cargo under a bill of lading, as well as arts 1.e and 7 of the Hague-Visby Rules. The insurer affirmed that its responsibility as a maritime carrier ended with the unloading of the containers and their delivery, which occurred when they were made available to the terminal, which took charge of the custody of the cargo from that moment.

Held: Appeal allowed. The decision issued on 11 March 2011 by the Eighth Section of the Provincial Court of Alicante is rescinded, in so far as it requires the appellant carrier to pay the respondent insurer, jointly and severally with the terminal, the sum of EUR 169,506.14.

According to the bill of lading, the cargo was to be transported to the port of Alicante and delivered there. It appears that the delivery of the cargo occurred when the carrier, after handling it in the port of Alicante, deposited it into the possession of the terminal. The circumstance that the appellant had been forced to hire another carrier to transport one of the containers by road to the city of Valencia - the container that had passed sanitary control - does not alter the consequence that the only party responsible for the damage was the terminal. The cargo damage was caused by the failure of a cooling system which occurred in the terminal's facilities, and while the cargo was in its custody. This was the sole cause of the cargo's deterioration.