After the terrorist attack in Berlin, journalists from almost all TV stations, newspapers and Internet portals reported that the carrier would have to pay the owner for damaged goods (rusty steel elements). Such media messages are not justified in the light of the provisions of the CMR Convention and judicial decisions and were most likely due to lack of knowledge or were aimed at further fueling emotions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pursuant to Art. 17 sec. 2 of the CMR Convention, the carrier is released from liability if the loss, damage to the shipment or delay in its delivery was caused by circumstances which the carrier could not avoid and the consequences of which he could not prevent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to the Supreme Court of November 17, 1998 (case no. III CKN 23\/98) "The circumstances exempting the carrier, listed in art. 17 sec. 2 of the CMR Convention of 1956, robbery with a weapon or the threat of its use may also be included.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n In the light of the above, the carrier is not liable for goods damaged as a result of a terrorist act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Legal adviser Jerzy Klimkowski<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" After the terrorist attack in Berlin, journalists from almost all TV stations, newspapers and Internet portals informed that the carrier would have to pay the owner for the damaged goods (rusted steel elements). Such media messages do not...<\/p>","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","class_list":["post-5300","z_sali_sadowej","type-z_sali_sadowej","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n