Open the full interactive guide and PDF checklist ↓

Late delivery can stop production, cause a lost sale or expose a customer to additional costs. But genuine loss does not mean that the compensation file against the carrier is automatically complete. For delay claims governed by the CMR, sending a written reservation to the carrier within twenty-one days is a separate condition.

In many disputes, the first question should not be “how many euros were lost?” but “when were the goods placed at the consignee's disposal, and what written communication was sent to the carrier?” A telephone call, an internal damage report or a notification to an insurer does not automatically replace the written reservation that must be directed to the carrier.

First establish whether the CMR applies

CMR Article 1 concerns carriage of goods by road in vehicles for reward, where the places of taking over and designated delivery are in two different countries and at least one is a contracting country. Treaty exceptions and particular transport structures must be checked separately. Merely having “CMR” in the document's heading is insufficient; examine the route and contract.

Under Article 4, the absence or irregularity of a CMR consignment note does not automatically negate the carriage contract or application of the Convention. Domestic carriage rules should therefore not be adopted simply because the note is missing. The contractual parties, carrier taking over the goods and delivery location can also be established from other documents. CMR Articles 1 and 4

When does the twenty-one-day period start?

Under CMR Article 30(3), no compensation for delay is payable unless a written reservation is sent to the carrier within twenty-one days from when the goods were placed at the consignee's disposal. Article 30(4) excludes the starting day from the calculation. For example, if the goods were placed at the consignee's disposal on 9 October, the ordinary calculation makes 10 October day one and 30 October day twenty-one; the specific date and notification evidence must still be checked.

The exclusion of Sundays and public holidays provided for the seven-day period for concealed damage is not stated in the same way for the twenty-one-day delay period. Transferring one calendar rule to the other is risky. The delivery record, warehouse receipt and documents showing when the consignee could actually exercise control over the goods should be examined together. CMR Article 30

This is not the general limitation period for bringing proceedings. It is a special notification condition for delay compensation, and its effect in barring the entitlement makes it critical in practice. The twenty-one-day reservation requirement cannot be disregarded because the one-year limitation period has not yet expired. Leaving notification until the final day also increases recipient, address and transmission risks.

How did the Court of Cassation assess the missing reservation?

In its decision of 10 June 2015, E.2015/2694, K.2015/8090, the 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation examined a claim for loss arising from delayed international road carriage. The trial court dismissed the case against one defendant for lack of passive standing; for the other defendant, it relied on application of the CMR and the absence of a written notification within twenty-one days from delivery or a reservation concerning delay at delivery.

The Court of Cassation unanimously affirmed that judgment. The decision is not a general ruling that delay losses never exist or that notification can only be made in one particular official form. Missing notification affected the outcome in this specific file. The lesson for a company is to verify its notification record from the outset while preparing the loss calculation. Full text of the decision

What information should the reservation contain?

The communication should identify the carriage and objection to delay clearly. It can state the sender and consignee, transport order or CMR number, goods, agreed delivery date, actual date of availability to the consignee and claim for loss caused by delay. It should be directed to the correct carrier; the legal capacity of a transport organizer must be checked separately.

An illustrative reservation might read: “The goods due for delivery on … under transport reference … were placed at the consignee's disposal on … . We object to the delay in delivery and notify our claim for compensation for the resulting losses. Supporting documents and a detailed calculation will follow.” This example must be adapted to the particular contract and facts.

CMR Article 30(3) requires writing; its wording does not mandate a notarial notice in every file. However, whether an ordinary email sufficiently establishes writing, the recipient and transmission depends on the specific evidence. Preserve the sent file, email headers, delivery records and replies. Complaining only by telephone or never sending a drafted letter is not a reliable approach.

Damage and delay notifications have different effects

Article 30(1) provides for reservations at delivery for apparent loss or damage, and within seven days of delivery for non-apparent loss or damage; concealed cases require writing, and Sundays and public holidays are excluded. Taking delivery without reservations gives rise to an evidential presumption that the goods were delivered in the condition described in the note. It is inaccurate to equate that presumption with automatic extinction of every damage claim.

Article 30(2), concerning joint checking of the goods by the parties, contains a further, more specific evidential rule. For delay, Article 30(3) instead makes notification a separate condition for compensation. Where one consignment involves both damage and delay, clearly identify each allegation and its own date rather than sending a single vague “there is a problem” message. CMR Article 30(1)–(4)

Delay and loss must also be proved

Under CMR Article 19, consider whether the agreed delivery period was exceeded or, where none was agreed, whether carriage exceeded the time reasonably expected of a diligent carrier. The defence that “there was no fixed date” does not itself eliminate the possibility of delay. The order, delivery plan, loading and customs records, vehicle location data and correspondence matter.

Under Article 23(5), loss caused by delay must be proved; ordinarily, compensation cannot exceed the carriage charges. This does not mean that the full carriage charge is automatically paid whenever delivery is late. If actual loss is lower, calculate the claim accordingly. For alleged production interruption, additional purchases or payments to customers, document the link to delay and the actual financial consequence.

Article 26 on declared special interest in delivery, or Article 29 on wilful misconduct and conduct treated as equivalent under the applicable law, may require separate examination. But saying “the delay was very long” does not prove every exception. Nor should an exception to a liability limit be presented as automatically removing the twenty-one-day reservation requirement. CMR Articles 19, 23(5), 26 and 29

Track limitation and the written compensation claim separately

CMR Article 32 provides a general one-year period, or three years for wilful misconduct or equivalent fault under the relevant law. For delay claims, time starts from delivery; the starting day is excluded. Sending the twenty-one-day reservation does not automatically produce a three-year period.

Under Article 32(2), a written compensation claim may suspend limitation until the carrier rejects it in writing and returns the attached documents. Receipt of the claim, the response and return of documents must be proved; further claims with the same object do not repeatedly suspend time. The contents and functions of the Article 30 reservation and Article 32 claim must be checked separately. Do not assume that sending a claim afterwards revives an expired notification period. CMR Article 32

How do litigation and enforcement in Türkiye differ?

CMR Article 31 sets out international jurisdiction options; the defendant's residence or principal business, the branch where the contract was made, the place of taking over or the designated delivery place may matter. In Türkiye, the commercial court has subject-matter jurisdiction over a commercial dispute. Pre-action mediation is required for commercial monetary claims, compensation and actions to annul an enforcement objection, subject to statutory exceptions; there is no separate “CMR mediation” system. CMR Article 31, TTK Articles 5 and 5/A

Starting general attachment proceedings without a judgment does not prove that the debt is justified under the CMR. The period for objecting to the payment order is seven days from service. The one-year period for an action to annul the objection starts when the objection is served on the creditor and is distinct from the underlying claim's CMR limitation period. İİK Articles 62 and 67

Statutory suspension rules apply between the application for mandatory pre-action mediation and the final record. Nevertheless, do not treat a mediation application as a reliable substitute for the CMR reservation to the carrier; complete the direct written notification separately and on time. Mediation or enforcement does not automatically cure an earlier omission. Law No. 6325, Article 18/A

Sources

← All guides · Türkçe

Answer the questions to see the relevant checks and document list. At the final step, mark your available documents and preview a PDF summary.