This was an appeal from a judgment of the Commercial Court No 2 of Bilbao/Bilboko which dismissed a claim brought by MAPFRE Empresas Cia de Seguros y Reaseguros SA (MAPFRE) against CEVA Freight España (CEVA) arising from damage to 75 containers of sangria carried to China, on the basis that the claim was time-barred. MAPFRE appealed.

Held: Appeal dismissed.

Article 277.2 of Law 14/2014, of 24 July, on Maritime Navigation (the LNM), provides that:

Contracts for national or international carriage of goods by sea under the bill of lading regime and liability of the carrier shall be governed by the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law relating to Bills of Lading, done in Brussels, on 25th August 1924, the Protocols that amend it to which Spain is a party, and this Act.

Article 3.6 of the Hague-Visby Rules provides for the exemption of the carrier from liability for loss or damage, unless a legal claim is filed within one year from the delivery of the goods. The jurisprudence has affirmed the compatibility of the national regulations with the provisions of the Convention (STS 512/2022, of 28 June, rec 204/2019, ECLI:ES:TS:2022:2674).

The bill of lading was signed on 4 November 2019, the cargo arrived at the port of destination on 8 January 2020, and the claim was not formulated until 26 March 2021, so more than a year had elapsed. The Court of first instance held that the suspension of procedural deadlines of DA 2 of RD 463/2020, of 14 March, declaring a state of emergency for the management of the health crisis situation caused by COVID-19, could not be applied.

The appellant points out that the suspension of deadlines was not only agreed for procedural issues, but that Additional Provision 4 of RD 463/2020 also provided for substantive ones. Indeed, this provision, labelled 'Suspension of prescription and expiration periods', clearly establishes that '[t]he prescription and expiration periods of any actions and rights will be suspended during the period of validity of the state of emergency and, where appropriate, of the extensions that will be adopted'. This forced the calculation to begin 81 days after the cargo arrived at the port of destination, which would determine that the appellant's action would remain unscathed, since the lawsuit was filed on 26 March 2021.

The respondent objects that since these are international standards, the suspension of deadlines established for the pandemic cannot be applied. This opinion is not shared, as the application of the Hague-Visby Rules in Spain has not been modified. The annual expiration period of art 3.6, which is not altered, continues to operate. What happens is that the calculation of the term is carried out in accordance with the Spanish legal system. It is also a global circumstance, as recognised by the World Health Organisation, so there is no harm in proceeding as provided for in DA 4 of RD 463/2020.

Consequently, the action brought by the appellant insurer was in force when the claim was filed.

However, based on a consideration of all the evidence, it can be concluded that there was no clear evidence that the reason for the loss was the poor transportation of the cargo. On the contrary, there are serious indications that the cargo had been poorly prepared for transportation by the shipper. Therefore, the exoneration of carrier liability established in art 4 of the Hague-Visby Rules applies, which entails the dismissal of the appellant's claim.