The insurer Rhone Mediterrannée (RM) sued the carrier Palm Line (PL) in the Tribunal of Naples, claiming cargo loss after the sinking of the Ashanti Palm after an allision with the breakwater. RM argued that under English law, PL was liable as the ship sank because of the negligence of the master and the crew in anchoring at the port. Moreover, the master, abandoning the vessel, failed to fulfil its duties to take into custody, care for, and recover the cargo that was not immediately lost, thereby allowing it to be looted.

Held: The claim is dismissed.

The Court emphasised that the incident concerned the nautical fault of the master and the crew, as their behaviour involved technical faults, mistakes of calculations, predictions, and manoeuvres. The Court recalled that under English law and art 4.2.a of the Hague Rules, nautical fault exempts the carrier from liability. The carrier is liable for the commercial fault of the master or the crew, but this behaviour implies faults in the carriage of the goods, such as unsuitable stowage of cargo.

As to the abandonment of the ship by the master, the Court pointed out that the Ashanti Palm sank very quickly. The master and crew only left the port once the vessel was submerged, as they no longer had any duties to perform. The Court also noted that neither PL nor its agent Di Luggo was required to have prepared a system of preservation of the goods at the bottom of the sea. In the case of a shipwreck, the contract of carriage was automatically terminated, and PL no longer had any obligations of custody or recovery of the goods.

In conclusion, the Court highlighted that, in any case, it was impossible to prepare a system of preservation of the goods and that the duty of their custody fell upon the Italian police forces, given that the goods were at the bottom of the sea.