On 21 July 2017, SAS Société Française de Commerce Européen (SFCE) purchased 166 Yamaha motorcycles. It entrusted Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd (MOL) with the transport of these goods between Chongqing (China) and Le Havre (France).

The two containers in which the goods were stuffed were loaded onto a barge, the Chong Lun J3010. On 31 July 2017, while the barge was sailing on the Yangtze River, it collided with the New Sailing 2, resulting in its sinking. Two crew members died and the goods were lost.

On 24 July 2018, SFCE and its insurers sued MOL in the Commercial Court of Le Havre which, by judgment of 19 December 2021, held against the claimants. SFCE and its insurers appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Held: Appeal dismissed.

Article 4.2 of the Hague-Visby Rules provides for certain exemptions from carrier liability, including 'act, neglect, or default of the master, mariner, pilot or the servants of the carrier in the navigation or in the management of the ship' (art 4.2.a).

MOL put forward which it declares to be an official report from the Chinese authorities on the circumstances of the sinking of the Chong Lun J3010. According to the two translations produced, this report comes from the Maritime Safety Administration of the People's Republic of China and determines the circumstances that led to the sinking of the Chong Lun J3010. The report indicates that the crew of the Chong Lun J3010, which was in the shipping lane of the Baimaosha segment of the Yangtze River in the general direction of the traffic of this lane, neglected their lookout by concentrating their attention on the vessels on their starboard when the New Sailing 2 had undertaken to cross the course taken by the barge on its port side.The report places primary liability on the New Sailing 2 and 'minor' or 'secondary' liability on the Chong Lun J3010.

The appellants maintain that the origin of the report produced is dubious, it is not signed, was not established following adversarial proceedings, is too brief, was not translated by a translator sworn, and has not been the subject of any legalisation. These arguments are rejected. Even if the report has no signature, it has a stamp 'MSA PR China', ie Maritime Security Administration of the People's Republic of China. This stamp provides proof of the document's authenticity. As it concerns an act emanating from an administrative authority, the fact that the report was not drawn up jointly does not, contrary to what the appellants maintain, attenuate its probative character. Finally, while the appellants refer to the succinct nature of this report, the Court finds that it contains numerous indications and details enabling the factual circumstances of the collision to be established. There is therefore no reason to regard this report as doubtful.

The Hague-Visby Rules have provided for a case of exemption of the carrier in the event of an 'act, neglect, or default of the master, mariner, pilot or the servants of the carrier in the navigation or in the management of the ship', without specifying that the fault referred to must be characterised by its severity, its enormity, or its inexcusable nature.

It follows that a simple fault of negligence committed by the captain or the crew in the conduct of the ship is such as to exonerate the carrier. Here, the failure of the barge's captain or crew to take the necessary manoeuvres to avoid a collision with another ship, in particular by failing to reduce speed, failing to stop the engines, or failing to reverse the means of propulsion and limiting itself to proceeding with a change of direction, constitutes a fault of navigation within the meaning of art 4.2.a of the Hague-Visby Rules, which exonerates MOL from any liability for the loss of goods.