De Wolf, the plaintiffs, shipped a Zodiac and spare parts in a container from Vancouver, Canada to Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The container was carried on deck by the defendants, Traffic-Tech International. The container was lost during the voyage and the plaintiffs suffered a loss of CAD 98,896.92. The bill of lading did not state that the cargo was carried on deck. The plaintiffs brought an action against the defendants. The defendants brought a motion for the preliminary determination of two questions of law. The two questions were the following:

1. Does the undeclared on-deck carriage of the cargo under the Traffic-Tech bill of lading prevent the defendant from relying on the Hague-Visby Rules?
2. In the negative, what are the limitations applicable to the contract of carriage pursuant to the Hague-Visby Rules?

Held: The shipment of De Wolf was ‘goods’ in the meaning of art 1.c of the Hague-Visby Rules because, even though it was carried on deck, it was not stated on the bill of lading that it was so carried. Thus, the Hague-Visby Rules remained applicable and the undeclared deck carriage did not prevent the defendant from relying on the Rules' limitation.

In the case before the Court, the limits applicable were those in art 4.5.a of the Hague-Visby Rules.