Turkey–Romania Missing Pallet Claims Under CMR: Package Count, Delivery Reservations and 8.33 SDR

1. CMR governs qualifying Turkey–Romania international road carriage

CMR Article 1 applies to carriage of goods by road for reward when the contractual place of taking over and the place designated for delivery are in two different countries and at least one is a Contracting State. Türkiye and Romania are CMR Contracting States. A commercial load collected in Bucharest for delivery in Mersin, or in Gaziantep for delivery in Cluj-Napoca, therefore falls within CMR when the remaining Article 1 conditions are present.

The claimant should identify the carriage contract and the defendant before calculating the shortage. A seller, freight forwarder, contractual carrier, subcontracted haulier, cross-dock warehouse and consignee may all handle documents, but their legal roles differ. Preserve the transport order, carrier acceptance, CMR/e-CMR, freight invoice, subcontract, loading list and delivery record.

If the shipment is consolidated with other cargo, identify whether the missing pallet was part of the same consignment note and whether the contract covered collection, consolidation and final delivery as one carriage. A missing item in a separate warehouse-storage phase may raise additional rules; it should not be assumed to fall within the same CMR custody period without examining the contract.

2. Article 8 puts package count, marks and apparent condition at the centre of the loading record

Article 8(1) requires the carrier, when taking over the goods, to check the accuracy of the statements in the consignment note concerning the number of packages and their marks and numbers, as well as the apparent condition of the goods and packaging. If the carrier has no reasonable means of checking the accuracy of the package-count statements, Article 8(2) requires reservations to be entered together with their grounds.

This distinction is critical in a missing-pallet claim. A consignment note stating “20 pallets” with no justified carrier reservation creates a materially different evidential starting point from a note marked “shipper load and count — sealed trailer — quantity not checked” with a supported reason. The legal effect depends on the precise reservation and the circumstances in which it was made.

The sender can require the carrier to check gross weight, quantity otherwise expressed and package contents, subject to reimbursement of the cost of those checks under Article 8(3). The result must be entered in the consignment note. For high-value multi-pallet cargo, this option can reduce later disputes about what was actually taken over.

Loading scans, pallet labels, SSCC or internal logistics codes, warehouse gate records, photographs and signed counts should be retained even when a paper CMR note exists. Article 8 establishes the treaty framework, but modern electronic evidence can show the practical loading sequence.

3. Article 9 gives the consignment note prima facie evidential effect

Article 9(1) states that the consignment note is prima facie evidence of the making of the contract of carriage, the conditions of the contract and receipt of the goods by the carrier. Article 9(2) further provides that, if the consignment note contains no specific reservations by the carrier, it is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the goods and packaging appeared to be in good condition when the carrier took them over and that the number of packages, marks and numbers corresponded with the statements in the note.

This is not an irrebuttable rule. The carrier can produce contrary proof. The claimant can likewise use loading evidence to challenge an inaccurate reservation. The purpose of Article 9 is evidential structure, not automatic victory for whichever party holds the paper document.

Electronic consignment-note systems can preserve the same core particulars under the e-CMR framework where its requirements are met. Keep the original audit trail, signatures and amendments. A PDF export that does not show a later quantity change can conceal relevant evidence.

A commercial packing list does not replace the CMR note, but it can identify which items were on the missing pallet and their individual weights and values. Match the packing list to the pallet label and transport documents rather than relying on an aggregate invoice alone.

4. Document the shortage before the truck leaves the delivery site

If the shortage is visible at delivery, count the pallets and packages in the driver’s presence. Record the expected quantity, delivered quantity and exact identifiers of missing units on the delivery document and CMR copy. Obtain the driver’s signature or record any refusal to sign. Take photographs showing the trailer, seal condition and unloaded quantity.

Do not use vague wording when the shortage is known. “One pallet missing — pallet ID X — 24 boxes” is more useful than “subject to count.” If the seal is intact, record its number and compare it with the loading seal record. If the seal differs or is broken, photograph it and preserve the physical seal where practical.

If the shortage becomes apparent only after unpacking, record when and how it was discovered. Article 30 contains the rule for non-apparent loss or damage and written reservations within seven days, Sundays and public holidays excepted. A hidden shortage inside a sealed pallet may therefore have a different reservation chronology from an entire visibly missing pallet.

Where delivery is to a distribution centre with automated receiving, export the scan records before they are overwritten. A receiving system can show whether a pallet entered the consignee’s custody and later disappeared internally. CMR liability depends on loss during the carrier’s responsibility period, not merely on the claimant’s final stock count.

5. Trace the pallet through every handover in the road-carriage chain

Article 17(1) makes the carrier liable for partial loss occurring between taking over and delivery. Where the route involved cross-docking or subcontracted vehicles, reconstruct each custody event: loading warehouse, trailer seal, consolidation terminal, border or customs stop, vehicle change and final delivery.

Article 3 makes the carrier responsible, within its terms, for servants, agents and other persons whose services it uses for performance. The contractual carrier cannot simply state that a subcontractor or depot handled the cargo and therefore deny the claim. The internal recourse question is distinct from the cargo claimant’s primary case.

For successive carriers meeting Articles 34–40, additional rules apply. The second and subsequent carriers can become parties to the contract under Article 34 by accepting the goods and consignment note, and Articles 36–40 regulate claims and recourse. Do not label every subcontractor a “successive carrier” without checking those treaty conditions.

Telematics can support the custody analysis, but a GPS location does not prove pallet count. Pair vehicle movement with warehouse scans, seal checks and handover signatures. The objective is to identify the last proved point at which the complete consignment was in carrier custody.

6. Article 23 requires value and gross weight for the missing pallet

Article 23(1) calculates compensation for total or partial loss by reference to the value of the goods at the place and time at which they were accepted for carriage. Article 23(2) uses commodity exchange price, current market price or, if neither applies, the normal value of goods of the same kind and quality.

Under the 1978 Protocol, the ordinary Article 23(3) ceiling is 8.33 SDR per kilogram of gross weight short. For a one-pallet shortage, use the gross weight of the missing goods, not the gross weight of the entire trailer. A packing list, pallet weight record and item-level data are therefore essential.

Article 23(4) also permits carriage charges, customs duties and other charges incurred in respect of carriage to be reimbursed in full for total loss and proportionately for partial loss. Separate these charges from the goods-value calculation.

Article 24 may substitute a higher declared value for the ordinary ceiling where its requirements, including the agreed surcharge and declaration in the consignment note, are met. A high invoice value alone is not an Article 24 declaration. Article 29 may remove limits when its misconduct threshold is proved, but an unexplained shortage alone does not automatically establish Article 29.

7. If the missing pallet is later found, Article 20 and the actual recovery must be documented

Article 20 contains the Convention’s deemed-loss rules for goods not delivered within specified periods and also addresses later recovery of goods treated as lost. For an immediately identified partial shortage, the ordinary partial-loss analysis remains central, but later recovery should be recorded carefully.

If the pallet is found at a terminal or another consignee after the claim was submitted, document the date, condition, seal, storage history and any deterioration. The claimant’s actual loss may change. Recovered goods can still be damaged or commercially devalued, but double recovery must be avoided.

Where the goods are returned after a customer cancelled the purchase, distinguish physical cargo damage from downstream commercial consequences. CMR compensation follows the Convention’s valuation and damage rules. The claimant should not retain full loss compensation while also retaining saleable recovered goods without accounting for their value.

Preserve all carrier notifications about the recovery. Article 20 contains specific rights concerning notification and delivery of recovered goods after compensation has been paid; those treaty rules should be applied to the actual recovery chronology.

8. Article 30 reservation rules depend on whether the shortage was apparent

Article 30(1) provides that acceptance of the goods without checking their condition with the carrier or sending the required reservations is prima facie evidence of receipt in the condition described by the consignment note. For apparent loss or damage, reservations should be made no later than delivery. For non-apparent loss or damage, the reservation must be in writing within seven days, Sundays and public holidays excepted.

The reservation should state the general nature of the loss or damage. In a pallet shortage, identify the quantity and pallet or package codes if known. Preserve proof of transmission when a written reservation is sent after delivery.

Article 30 reservation rules do not replace Article 32 limitation. They protect the evidential position at delivery. A separate written claim should be prepared with valuation, weight and supporting documents, and the limitation-suspension rule in Article 32(2) should be considered.

9. Article 32 limitation and Article 31 jurisdiction must be calculated from the actual claim

Article 32 provides an ordinary one-year period, extended to three years for the Convention’s wilful-misconduct/equivalent-default category. For partial loss, time runs from the date of delivery. The triggering day is excluded from the period.

A written claim suspends the period under Article 32(2) until written rejection and return of the documents attached to the claim. Keep the claim, proof of receipt, rejection and returned documents together in the deadline file.

Article 31 provides the international jurisdiction framework. Depending on the defendant’s specified business connection, place of taking over, designated delivery place and any valid agreed Contracting-State court, a Turkey–Romania dispute may be litigated in Türkiye, Romania or another permitted forum. Domestic rules then determine the specific court within the chosen state.

Frequently asked questions

Official sources

UNIDROIT — CMR Convention, especially Articles 3, 8–9, 17, 20, 23–24, 30–32 and 34–40; United Nations Treaty Collection — 1978 Protocol to CMR.