The plaintiff, Jemco Sdn Bhd, engaged the services of the second defendant, MCC Transport Singapore Pte Ltd, a shipping company based in Singapore, to deliver two containers to its customer in Indonesia. It is not disputed that the first defendant, Maersk Malaysia Sdn Bhd, was the agent of the second defendant and is based in Malaysia. The plaintiff contends that its containers were confiscated by the Indonesian Customs due to the first defendant's negligence in preparing the manifest.

Held: Action dismissed.

At all material times, the first defendant was acting as the second defendant's agent. This fact is evident from the waybill which shows that the first defendant had signed in its capacity as agent for the carrier (the second defendant). By law an agent is not bound by contracts entered by it on behalf of its principal (s 183, Contracts Act 1955; Plantation Agencies Sdn Bhd v Hj Ariffin Hj Ismail [1978] 1 MLJ 219 (FC)).

Under cl 5 of the contract between the plaintiff and the second defendant, the Hague Rules are applicable (s 2, Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1950). Accordingly, an action must be brought within one year after the date when the goods should have been delivered. This limitation period is also consistent with cl 9 of the waybill. As the ship arrived at port of destination on 16 March 2009, the time bar crystallised on 17 March 2010. According to cl 4.2 of the contract, the benefit of this provision is also extended in favour of the first defendant. Since this action was only filed on 17 May 2011, it is time-barred and unsustainable.