Today, many people actively use online shopping sites. Moreover, not only technological devices, but also clothes, furniture, food products, even houses and automobiles are purchased. However, many things can happen to you during the shipping process until the products we receive are delivered to us. Today, a precedent decision was taken on the subject of “broken cargo”.
Supreme Court made the final point! What if broken cargo arrives?
A citizen bought a Turkish Coffee machine online via the website. After opening the box of the product, he realized that it was broken and applied to the Consumer Arbitration Committee. Afterwards, a long process began until the precedent decision by the Supreme Court.
Here, THH found the consumer right and signed a decision to return the price of the product. However, the cargo company appealed against the decision and filed a lawsuit against THH. As the reason, he stated that the consumer received the cargo without any reservation.
The new era begins in WhatsApp groups!
WhatsApp, the instant messaging platform owned by Meta, increases the number of participants in groups to improve the user experience.
The consumer, on the other hand, stated that there was no obvious damage in the box of the product, but that he had photographs and a witness that it was broken during shipping. Thereupon, the court found the consumer right and decided that the cargo company was responsible for the transportation and safety of the goods and did not fulfill its duty.
However, the case file went to the 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, as the Ministry of Justice made a request on the grounds of incomplete examination. Here, on the other hand, he takes a precedent decision to overturn the decisions given that the sufficiency of the evidence presented in the previous hearings has not been questioned, stating that since the buyer did not have an official declaration that the cargo was damaged when receiving it, a presumption was formed in favor of the cargo company and that the consumer is now the person who needs to prove it.
The following was stated in the precedent decision:
“In order for the sender or the consignee to exercise their rights against the carrier in the event of loss or damage, it is necessary to make a reservation while receiving the goods, and to make a notification within the periods specified in the law and as specified in the law.
In the concrete case, the plaintiff transportation company claimed that the shipment was delivered to the recipient and that the cargo was received by the recipient without any reservations. The defendant relied on photographs and witness statements as evidence.
The court decided to reject the case on the grounds that in the photographs submitted to the file, the commodity subject to the contract of carriage was broken, the plaintiff cargo company did not fully fulfill its obligation, and there was no fault to be attributed to the defendant.
If no damage notification is made, as accepted in the settled case law of our office, there is a presumption in favor of the carrier that the goods were delivered in accordance with the contract. The burden of proof to the contrary falls on the buyer in this case.
The defendant party, who is the buyer, submitted a photograph in this direction to the file and relied on the witness statement. In this case, the decision had to be reversed, since it was not considered correct to decide whether the evidence presented by the defendant was sufficient to prove the contrary of the presumption in favor of the plaintiff.
With the acceptance of the request of the Ministry of Justice to reverse the issue based on Article 363 of the Code of Civil Procedure numbered 6100, it was unanimously decided to overturn the judgment in favor of the law, without being effective in the outcome.
What do you think about this subject? Don’t forget to share your views with us in the comments!