CMR Article 8 Carrier Checks at Collection: Package Count, Marks and Reasoned Reservations

1. What CMR Article 8 requires when the carrier takes over the goods

Article 8 begins at the moment the carrier takes over the goods. Paragraph 1 requires two categories of checks. Under Article 8(1)(a), the carrier must check the accuracy of the statements in the consignment note concerning the number of packages and their marks and numbers. Under Article 8(1)(b), the carrier must check the apparent condition of the goods and their packaging.

These are not unlimited technical inspections. The Convention distinguishes visible, operationally checkable facts from hidden qualities that ordinarily require opening, weighing, testing or specialist analysis. The duty regarding condition is expressly limited to apparent condition. Package-count information is subject to the practical rule in Article 8(2): if the carrier has no reasonable means of checking it, the carrier must record a reasoned reservation rather than pretend that verification occurred.

The Article 8 record becomes important because Article 9 creates prima facie evidentiary effects. When the consignment note contains no specific carrier reservations, the Convention presumes, unless the contrary is proved, that the goods and packaging appeared to be in good condition at takeover and that package number, marks and numbers corresponded with the note.

2. Package number, marks and numbers must be compared with the consignment note

Article 8(1)(a) is directed to identifiable package information. If the note states 24 pallets, 480 cartons or crates carrying specified marks and serial references, the carrier must check the accuracy of those statements so far as Article 8 requires. The carrier should not sign a clean note mechanically while simultaneously maintaining internally that no package count was possible.

Package identification is particularly important where only part of the shipment is later missing. A claim for partial loss should identify which packages were taken over and which were not delivered. Container or trailer seal evidence can support the chronology but does not replace a package count when counting was reasonably possible. Conversely, a sealed unit presented to a carrier in circumstances where opening or counting individual packages is not reasonably possible is exactly the kind of situation in which Article 8(2) requires a reservation with grounds.

Marks and numbers can include pallet labels, case numbers, shipping marks and other visible identifiers entered on the CMR note. Record them accurately. A generic statement that “cargo received” does not resolve a later dispute where several consignments share a trailer or where package-level identification determines which owner suffered the loss.

3. The carrier must check the apparent condition of the goods and packaging

Article 8(1)(b) concerns apparent condition. Torn cartons, crushed corners, wet external packaging, broken pallets, visible rust, open drums, damaged wrapping or a visibly compromised seal can be relevant at takeover. If the defect is apparent, it should be described in the consignment note rather than left for a later internal report.

The legal concept is not a guarantee that the goods are internally perfect. A carrier does not certify an unseen machine component, hidden contamination or the internal quality of sealed cartons simply because the visible exterior appears normal. The note records what could reasonably be seen and what the Convention specifically requires to be checked.

Photographs strengthen the record but do not replace the Article 8 entry. A photograph may later show external damage, yet the absence of a specific reservation in the signed note triggers Article 9’s presumption unless contrary proof is established. The safer operational practice is to photograph the issue and enter the corresponding, specific reservation in the CMR note at the time of takeover.

4. What happens when the carrier has no reasonable means of checking?

Article 8(2) does not permit silent non-verification. Where the carrier has no reasonable means of checking the accuracy of the package statements described in Article 8(1)(a), it must enter reservations in the consignment note together with the grounds on which they are based. The ground is part of the reservation.

A sealed trailer, inaccessible packages, loading completed before the driver arrived, packaging that prevents counting internal units, or operational circumstances that genuinely prevent a check may be relevant facts. The note should describe the actual obstacle. A formula copied onto every shipment regardless of the facts is weaker than a shipment-specific explanation.

The phrase “no reasonable means” must be applied to the real collection circumstances. A carrier cannot deliberately avoid an easy count and then claim that checking was impossible. Equally, CMR does not require destructive opening of packaging merely to verify a statement where such inspection is not reasonably available within normal takeover operations.

5. A CMR Article 8 reservation must state its grounds

Article 8(2) expressly requires the grounds for a package-information reservation and likewise requires grounds for reservations concerning apparent condition. A useful reservation identifies what was not verified or what defect was observed and explains why.

Examples of fact-specific wording include: “26 sealed pallets presented; individual cartons inaccessible and not counted,” “right-front corner of crate visibly crushed before takeover,” or “outer stretch wrap torn on pallet 7 at collection.” These examples illustrate the structure required by the treaty: identify the subject of the reservation and the factual ground. They should not be copied where the stated fact did not occur.

Generic formulas such as “contents unknown,” “unchecked” or “subject to inspection” can create evidential disputes because they do not necessarily explain the practical reason for non-verification or identify an observed defect. The Convention’s text requires a reasoned reservation. The actual wording should therefore correspond to the actual collection condition.

6. Article 8 reservations do not bind the sender unless the sender expressly agrees

Article 8(2) adds an important qualification: the carrier’s reservations do not bind the sender unless the sender has expressly agreed to be bound by them in the consignment note. A carrier cannot unilaterally convert its own reservation into an agreed fact merely by writing it on its retained copy after collection.

For evidence purposes, preserve the copy showing the reservation at the time of signature and any sender acknowledgement. This is one reason the Article 5 three-original system matters. The sender’s original, the copy accompanying the goods and the carrier’s retained copy can be compared to establish whether the reservation existed when the parties separated and whether the sender expressly accepted it.

If copies differ, preserve all of them. Do not alter the sender’s copy or create a reconstructed “clean” or “reserved” version after a loss. The timing and authenticity of the entry become evidential issues that should be answered by contemporaneous originals, scans, electronic audit trails and witness evidence.

7. The sender can require checks of gross weight, quantity or package contents

Article 8(3) gives the sender a separate right to require the carrier to check the gross weight of the goods or their quantity otherwise expressed. The sender may also require the contents of the packages to be checked. The carrier is entitled to claim the cost of such checking, and the result must be entered in the consignment note.

This rule goes beyond the basic Article 8(1) checks. If a sender wants a carrier-confirmed weight or an inspection of package contents, it should make the request before takeover is completed and ensure the result is recorded. A later assertion that the carrier “must have known” the internal quantity is not equivalent to an Article 8(3) requested check.

Weighbridge tickets, certified scales and count sheets can support the entry. Match the measurement to the specific vehicle and consignment. Where the gross weight in the commercial invoice, customs declaration and CMR note differs, the discrepancy should be investigated before it becomes central to a compensation calculation under Article 23.

8. Article 9 gives legal consequences to a clean CMR note

Article 9(1) makes the consignment note prima facie evidence of the making of the carriage contract, its conditions and receipt of the goods by the carrier. Article 9(2) then creates presumptions where the note contains no specific carrier reservations: the goods and packaging are presumed to have appeared in good condition at takeover, and package number, marks and numbers are presumed to correspond with the note.

The presumption is rebuttable, not absolute. Contrary evidence can be produced. But a carrier that signs a clean note and later alleges visible pre-existing damage starts from a more difficult evidential position. Similarly, a claimant relying on package count can use the Article 9 presumption where the carrier recorded no reasoned Article 8 reservation.

Article 9 should therefore be read directly after Article 8. Operational staff who treat collection reservations as paperwork formalities can materially affect later litigation. The note should reflect the actual condition and actual scope of verification at the time of takeover.

9. Collection-stage evidence checklist

Preserve original electronic files and full images rather than screenshots cropped around favourable details. A complete timeline is more useful than isolated material because it permits verification of whether a reservation was contemporaneous.

10. Turkey-connected international road freight

For a shipment taken over in Türkiye for international road delivery, Article 8 should be applied at the loading site before the vehicle leaves. If the goods are collected abroad for delivery in Türkiye, the same treaty rule applies where the carriage falls within Article 1. The nationality of the driver or carrier does not change the Article 8 duty.

Customs documents can corroborate weight, package count, vehicle and seal information, but they do not replace the CMR collection record. The private-law carriage evidence should be preserved separately from customs formalities. Where a mismatch exists, do not silently edit the CMR note after departure; document the correction process and authority for any amendment.

Foreign senders and cargo interests should obtain the sender copy at collection and the delivery copy after arrival. A Turkish carrier should preserve its retained original and TMS record. Electronic messages about visible damage or inability to count should be exported with timestamps and linked to the relevant shipment reference.

11. How Article 8 affects cargo claims and carrier defences

Article 8 does not itself impose compensation. Liability for loss, damage and delay is principally governed by Article 17, with burden-of-proof rules in Article 18 and compensation rules in Articles 23–27. Article 8 and Article 9 determine important evidentiary facts at the starting point: what appeared to be taken over and whether the carrier recorded any relevant reservation.

A cargo claimant should compare the pickup record with the delivery record and quantify any difference. A carrier relying on pre-existing damage or count discrepancy should identify its Article 8 reservation and grounds. If there was no reservation, the carrier must address the Article 9 presumption with contrary evidence rather than simply assert that the sender loaded the truck.

Do not confuse an Article 8 reservation with an Article 30 reservation. The first is made by or for the carrier at takeover; the second concerns reservations by the consignee at delivery or within the treaty period for non-apparent damage. Both can appear in the same claim file but answer different evidential questions.

Related English CMR guides

CMR Article 5: three original consignment-note copies · CMR Article 6 mandatory fields · CMR Article 3 carrier responsibility · Road cargo damage in Turkey.

Frequently asked questions

Official legal source

UNIDROIT — CMR Convention, Articles 5 and 8–9. The Convention text controls. This page is general English-language legal information and does not replace examination of the actual consignment note and collection evidence.