Contracts – admiralty

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Contracts – admiralty

Where it is unclear which party arranged for the shipment of goods, summary judgment was improper.

“Although the World bill of lading indicates that the goods were shipped FOB, Wember testified that this was an error. He claims that the true purchase terms between Plano and CMT were DDP, and that CMT, not Plano, should have been listed as the consignee on World’s bill of lading; however, he admitted that no correction or change was ever made. Further complicating matters is that CMT sent Plano an invoice dated July 14, 2005. This invoice charged Plano for the price of the molds, as well as shipping; CMT paid World directly for certain shipping costs, billing Plano later. CMT also paid the import duty and custom cleared service charge, and then invoiced Plano. These facts suggest DDP shipping terms, whereby CMT, rather than Plano, would make the shipping arrangements.”

Affirmed in part, and Reversed in part.

11-2949 & 11-2967 Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd., v. Plano Molding Co.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Leinenweber, J., Flaum, J.