We Defeated a €7,400 Container Damage Claim in a Technical Flexitank Shipping Dispute
The Situation
A Spanish wine producer was drawn into a maritime transport dispute after a container carrying wine in a flexitank was found damaged during transshipment at the port of Istanbul.
The shipment had travelled from Valencia to Burgas, Bulgaria. During handling in Turkey, the carrier detected deformation to the container, including damage to the side panels, doors and bottom rails. The carrier alleged that the damage had been caused by gases generated during the fermentation of the wine, which supposedly caused the flexitank to expand and deform the container from the inside.
The claim was brought against both the freight forwarder and the wine producer, seeking €7,400.05 plus interest and legal costs.
The Challenge
The case turned on a highly technical causation issue: whether the container damage had really been caused by the cargo itself, or whether it was more consistent with external damage during port handling, stowage or transport operations.
The claim involved several difficulties:
The claimant relied on expert evidence suggesting that fermentation gases had caused the flexitank to expand.
A letter of indemnity had been signed, which the claimant tried to use as a basis for recovery.
The damage had been discovered during an international maritime journey, after the container had left the loading point.
The container was old, dating from 2007, raising questions about its condition and suitability.
The claimed amount included repair, transshipment and banking costs whose basis and proportionality were disputed.
Success required dismantling the claimant’s theory of causation and showing that the evidence did not support a finding of liability against the shipper or the freight forwarder.
The Solution
We built the defence around causation, expert analysis and the physical mechanics of flexitank transport.
The strategy focused on showing that the claimant’s explanation was speculative and unsupported by the evidence:
We challenged the allegation that the wine had fermented during the journey.
We relied on evidence from the consignee confirming that the wine arrived in good condition, with no defects in its organoleptic properties.
We argued that a true fermentation issue would likely have affected the quality, smell or taste of the wine.
We highlighted that the alleged internal pressure from a flexitank would act mainly laterally, not vertically.
We showed that damage to the bottom rails was inconsistent with a simple expansion of the flexitank.
We argued that the damage was more consistent with an external dynamic event, such as impact during port handling, incorrect support, partial dropping, machinery damage or abrupt movement during stowage.
We also challenged the proportionality and proof of the amounts claimed.
The defence reframed the dispute from an alleged cargo defect into a failure by the claimant to prove the true cause of the container damage.
The Result
The Commercial Court of Barcelona fully dismissed the claim.
The court found that the evidence did not prove that the container deformation was caused by gases from the wine or by any inherent defect in the cargo. It accepted that the claimant’s theory was conjectural and that the damage to the bottom rails was not compatible with a mere internal expansion of the flexitank.
As a result, the court:
Rejected the claim in full.
Absolved both the freight forwarder and the wine producer.
Found no proven causal link between the cargo and the container damage.
Ordered the claimant to pay the legal costs.
The client avoided liability for the full claim and obtained judicial confirmation that, in technical cargo disputes, liability cannot be imposed without clear evidence of causation.
