This case involved carriage by sea of a motor yacht by Sevenstar Yacht Transport BV (Sevenstar), subject to its terms and conditions, from Jebel Ali in the Persian Gulf to Genoa, Italy (and allegedly back again). During loading, the yacht was damaged. The yacht was also delivered late, and the return transport failed to materialise. The appellant, the owner of the yacht, claimed compensation for the damage. Sevenstar claimed payment of the return freight. The Court also had to decide whether the Hague-Visby Rules were applicable, and whether Sevenstar could invoke the exonerations in its general terms and conditions.

Held: Sevenstar is not entitled to return freight. The Hague-Visby Rules are not applicable. Sevenstar can rely on its general terms and conditions.

Interlocutory judgment of 7 December 2021

The parties' agreement does not envisage a 'round trip'. When the first transport was booked, the second transport was not included. Sevenstar was not reasonably entitled to expect otherwise. The appellant was not required to offer the yacht to Sevenstar for the second transport or to pay for it.

Final judgment of 5 July 2022

Sevenstar's terms and conditions provide (among other things) that 'no bill of lading shall be issued for the carriage of the Yacht.' Subsequently, no bill of lading was issued, and the parties did not intend Sevenstar to do so. This is thus not a contract of carriage under a bill of lading as referred to in art 8:371 of the Dutch Civil Code (DCC) (art 1.b of the Hague-Visby Rules). Accordingly, the Hague-Visby Rules do not apply.

It is true that some clauses in Sevenstar's general terms and conditions do affect the carrier's main statutory obligation to deliver the goods received for carriage to their destination in the condition in which they were received, but that is insufficient reason to consider reliance on these clauses unacceptable according to standards of reasonableness and fairness. The appellant is not a consumer, and the statutory provision of art 8:379 DCC (the carrier's duty to carry without delay) is not mandatorily applicable here.