An insurance company brought a subrogated action demanding IRR 141,671,000 for cargo damage, along with legal fees and damages for late payment. The cargo was carried under a bill of lading dated 11 May 2012.

The Judge found that company S was the carrier, which, according to arts 52 and 54 of the Maritime Code (based on arts 1 and 3 of the Hague Rules respectively) and arts 377 and 386 of the Commercial Code, was liable for compensating the damage. In this case, the defendant was the agent of company S in Iran and did not play a role in the carriage of the goods. The documents and evidence, including the delivery order and the customs minute, did not establish the defendant's liability to compensate for the damage. According to Unity of Procedure Judgment No 29 (CMI2438), the carrier's agent has no liability to compensate for the damage, and it was not proved that the agent had authorities or obligations that would make it liable.

The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal of Tehran Province.

Held: Appeal rejected.

The appellant failed to provide any convincing reason or evidence that would have resulted in the first instance Court's judgment being struck down. The appealed judgment is affirmed.