When are undelivered goods treated as lost under CMR? Thirty or sixty days and the claim file

Full topic-specific Information Guide ↓

When a lorry has departed but the goods never reach the consignee, treating every delay as an immediate total loss—or waiting months for news from the carrier—can both put the file at risk. CMR provides criteria for treating undelivered goods as lost. Loss, entitlement to claim, the carrier’s defences and compensation are nevertheless different questions. Start by establishing the shipment and delivery chronology from actual records rather than relying only on “the vehicle did not arrive”.

First establish CMR scope and the delivery facts

Check carriage of goods by road for reward, contractual collection and delivery places in different countries, and the contracting-state connection. A document headed CMR does not alone prove all scope requirements. Identify the contractual carrier and who took over the goods. Warehouse storage, customs processing, an impediment to carriage and actual delivery must not be treated as interchangeable events.

For partial or eventual delivery, distinguish missing quantities, damage and delay. Non-delivery of the entire consignment and a shortage of several pallets do not necessarily use the same starting event. Read signatures, stamps, dates and the recipient’s authority in the delivery record. A tracking status saying “delivered” does not itself establish delivery to the right person in the correct quantity.

Thirty days with an agreed delivery limit; otherwise sixty

Under Article 20(1), non-delivery within thirty days after expiry of an agreed delivery limit, or within sixty days of the carrier taking over the goods where no limit was agreed, constitutes conclusive evidence of loss. The entitled person may then treat the goods as lost. The alternatives use different starting events; simply adding sixty days to an invoice date is incorrect.

Compare the quotation, transport order, correspondence and timing entry in the consignment note first. A date promised by the consignee under a separate sales contract does not invariably show that the carrier accepted the same deadline. An estimated arrival and an agreed delivery limit may be disputed. If an amendment is alleged, identify who accepted it, when and with what authority.

Does delivery to the wrong person count as proper delivery?

Where delivery to another address or company is alleged, similar company names are insufficient. Examine instructions changing the consignee, authority of the person receiving the goods and copies of the consignment note. Articles 12–13 matter for disposal rights and instructions binding the carrier. Goods physically present in a warehouse may still not have been delivered according to the contract.

In its judgment of 1 March 2016, E.2015/5169, K.2016/2241, the Eleventh Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation examined food sent to France but delivered to another company. In circumstances where proper consignee-change instructions and the recipient’s authority were not proved, it accepted the loss and liability assessment, but reversed in the carrier’s favour because compensation had been calculated without addressing valuation, limits and Article 29.

The judgment does not establish that delivery to another person invariably requires payment of the whole invoice. It separates the delivery problem from calculation of compensation. Proof of actual loss by other evidence also needs assessment; the thirty- or sixty-day criterion is not a reason to postpone all evidence gathering in every loss case. Do not transfer the result to another shipment without comparing the facts.

What should the claim file contain?

Match the carriage contract and order, taking-over record, agreed deadline, consignee non-receipt records and tracking correspondence to the same shipment. Preserve package counts, goods description and gross weight. Explain the particular fact supported by any police, warehouse or customs record. An investigation number or vehicle location may not itself establish the final position of the goods.

Prepare sales invoices, inventory movements and the loss calculation alongside the claimant’s capacity. Claims by sender, consignee, insurer and a carrier seeking recourse do not necessarily rest on the same right. Examine entitlement and any transfer after payment separately. This guide does not determine who may sue without reviewing the file; knowing a carrier’s name also does not alone identify the proper defendant.

Treating goods as lost does not settle the compensation amount

As the judgment emphasises, separately examine value at the time and place of taking over and applicable liability limits. The sales invoice, a value declared for carriage and a special interest in delivery are different records. Article 29 conditions excluding reliance on a limit are not automatically satisfied merely because the goods have not been located.

Assess carrier defences, the actual carriage sequence and the nature of each claimed item together. Alleged lost business or customer complaints do not make every item automatically recoverable. A documented calculation reduces the risk of an unnecessarily inflated claim and costs. Establish the legal regime first and then the amount supported by evidence.

What if the goods are recovered after compensation?

Articles 20(2)–(3) allow the compensated claimant to request written notification if goods are recovered within the year after payment, with written acknowledgement of that request. Within thirty days of notification, delivery may be required on the provision’s terms concerning payment of charges and repayment of compensation less included charges, without prejudice to delay claims. This does not permit unconditional retention of both compensation and goods.

For that possibility, separately retain the payment date, notification request, acknowledgement and goods description. On receiving recovery news, verify that the goods belong to the shipment and establish their condition. Ignoring notification or giving late instructions may have consequences distinct from the original loss. Do not instruct recovery or disposal without checking local law and the remaining Article 20 conditions.

Court action, enforcement and limitation have separate calendars

Article 32 generally provides one year, or three in the specified aggravated-fault circumstances. For total loss, time starts on the thirtieth day after the agreed delivery limit or, absent a limit, the sixtieth day after taking over; the starting day is excluded. Although connected to Article 20’s loss criterion, expiry does not mean that loss never occurred. Separately verify any suspension through a written claim.

Assess Article 31 jurisdictional connections through party agreement, the relevant defendant business establishment and collection or delivery places. Separately examine subject-matter jurisdiction and Article 5/A mediation for commercial compensation proceedings in Türkiye. CMR does not replace Turkish payment-order and objection procedures. For ordinary enforcement, separately check Article 62’s seven days and Article 67’s one year for objection annulment starting from service of the objection on the creditor.

Preparation involves more than counting days: establish when the carrier took over, the agreed deadline, any alleged recipient and who may claim what amount. The full guide below connects those questions to a topic-specific document checklist. It submits no claim, produces no success score, collects no personal data and calculates neither definitive compensation nor an individual deadline.

Sources

General information; individual documents, facts and procedures need separate review.

Undelivered goods: CMR loss-claim preparation guide

Answer the topic-specific questions, select your records, then view your tailored preparation summary and office-branded PDF.