Mersin Bulk Cargo Shortage: Draft Survey, Shore Weighbridge Records and Turkish Maritime Evidence

Start with the missing tonnes, not the name of a survey

When a vessel discharges bulk minerals or agricultural commodities at Mersin, the receiver may claim that the shore weighbridge registered fewer tonnes than the bill of lading. The carrier may rely on a draft survey and say the shortage is measurement variation rather than physical loss. Neither document should be treated as an automatic verdict. The legal question is what quantity the carrier accepted, which quantity was delivered under the relevant carriage contract, what evidence supports each figure, and whether the discrepancy arose while the cargo remained in the carrier’s legal custody. Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, especially Articles 1178 and 1184–1188, provides a framework where Turkish maritime carriage law applies. The first step is to describe the specific cargo lot, contractual route, measuring systems and custody transfers, not to insert a shortage percentage into a demand letter without reviewing its basis.

Identify the cargo lot and every contractual party

A bulk carrier may load several parcels with the same commodity description for different buyers. Compare the charter party, booking confirmation, sea waybill or bill of lading, commercial invoice, cargo manifest, stowage plan, hatch allocation and customs declaration. Determine whether the receiver, trader, shipper, contractual carrier, actual carrier and terminal operator are distinct companies. If the loss is claimed by an assignee or cargo insurer, preserve the assignment or subrogation record. Do not assume the entity whose name appears on a weighbridge receipt is the owner entitled to sue. Different cargo parcels can have different load ports, tolerances or risk-transfer provisions. A useful legal dossier identifies the consignor and consignee for each parcel, the documentary quantity, the allocated hold and the contractual persons responsible for carriage and discharge.

Understand how a draft survey estimates shipboard weight

A draft survey estimates the vessel’s displacement from observed waterline drafts, hydrostatic tables and corrections for ballast, bunkers, consumables, trim and water density. It is not a direct scale reading of cargo. Obtain the actual draft marks recorded at each reading point, the date and time, water density measurement, the vessel’s applicable hydrostatic tables, tank soundings and calculations before and after loading or discharge. Ask who attended, what environmental conditions were recorded, and whether the ship was moored in a way that affected observation. Different surveyors may use different density corrections or assumptions about unpumpable tank contents. Request the worksheets and original measurements, not only the signed front page declaring a total tonnage. A numerical difference may represent a methodological issue rather than cargo that physically disappeared.

Understand what the shore weighbridge actually measured

A terminal weighbridge can provide gross truck weight, tare weight and a calculated net quantity for each movement. Its accuracy depends on calibration, sampling, vehicle identification, axle configuration, gate controls, the chronology of tare readings and whether every trip was recorded. Inspect the scale certificate, maintenance and adjustment log, operator details, ticket serial numbers, vehicle plate numbers and software export. Identify tickets that were voided, reissued or entered manually. A net weight calculated from a stale tare can be misleading, and a truck leaving with residues or water can affect the apparent total. A receiving company’s own inventory report may reflect later processing losses rather than discharge weight. Compare physical weighbridge transactions with the gate register and ship-to-shore handling log before alleging that either party falsified data.

Reconcile the bill of lading with underlying loading evidence

A bill of lading can be important evidence of the shipment received, but its legal effects depend on the wording, any quantity reservations, the holder’s position and the applicable law. A document that states a number followed by an explicit shipper-declared quantity notation must not be read as if the carrier had independently weighed the entire parcel without qualification. Review loading-port survey records, mate’s receipts, tally statements, draft observations and reservations made when the document was issued. Compare units carefully: metric tonnes, kilograms, gross and net weight, and any moisture adjustment should not be silently combined. If original documents differ, preserve each issued version and establish who made the change. A receiver’s claim should explain which quantity is legally relevant and why, rather than merely comparing two large numbers.

Locate the point where custody legally changed

Article 1178 of the Turkish Commercial Code ties the carrier’s responsibility for loss, damage or delay to the period when the goods are in its custody as defined by the statutory and contractual circumstances. The cargo may move from ship to shore hopper, to conveyor, to warehouse, to trucks and finally to a buyer’s processing site. Document each handover separately. A cargo shortage identified a week after delivery could reflect a genuine sea-carriage loss, a terminal handling issue or a later inventory error. The physical location of the material is not the sole legal test: consider when the carrier handed it over to the consignee or the legally relevant terminal authority. Obtain signed delivery receipts, terminal discharge completion reports and receipts from onward hauliers to distinguish potentially responsible periods.

Inspect the charter party without merging separate duties

A charter party may allocate stevedoring, tallying and discharge responsibilities differently from the contract evidenced by a bill of lading. The identities of the charterer, carrier, shipowner and consignee matter. Record any clauses on free in and out arrangements, named independent surveyors, customary loss allowances, sampling, cargo moisture and short-landing claims. But do not assume a term in an unseen charter party automatically binds every third-party holder of a bill of lading. Equally, do not assume that a terminal invoice answers the carrier’s statutory obligations. The legal memorandum should state which contractual document governs which relationship and whether mandatory carriage protections affect purported exclusions or liability limits. Where arbitration or choice-of-law clauses are involved, review their actual enforceability for the particular claimant.

Distinguish natural shrinkage from negligent loss

Article 1182 addresses specified circumstances in which statutory presumptions concerning the carrier’s fault and causal connection may arise, including losses attributable to the inherent nature of goods or shrinkage by volume or weight. It does not declare that every difference between ship and shore measurements is automatically an allowable shortage. For a moisture-sensitive commodity, obtain independent moisture and laboratory measurements at loading and discharge, identify the sampling method and ascertain whether the two samples can fairly be compared. For ore or scrap, examine residues in holds, spillage at transfer points, theft incidents and mixing between parcels. Ask whether the material was wet, was washed, was processed or was exposed to rain before weighing. A properly analysed natural-loss defence requires technical evidence and the correct legal framework.

Make a discharge timeline before the trucks disappear

Build an event ledger beginning with the vessel’s arrival and ending with final cargo release. Include notice of readiness, berth time, hatch opening, first grab, each shift change, conveyor stoppages, weather interruptions, truck dispatches and final hold cleaning. Preserve the terminal’s gate and access systems before routine retention policies delete them. Document times in a consistent time zone and retain the original system’s timestamp. Where two survey companies attended at different times, specify whether they measured the same condition. A closure report signed after the vessel departed may summarize events without preserving their sequence. Temporal reconstruction helps test whether a shortage appeared before shore storage, during weighing, or only after the buyer moved the material to another facility.

Preserve samples and laboratory methods where quantity depends on moisture

Water content can affect the payable mass of certain bulk commodities and the reliability of comparative weighing. If the contract specifies a moisture basis, preserve the laboratory standard, sample labels, collection times, sealed sample containers, test reports and records of who had access to the specimens. Ensure that a retest is scientifically meaningful: a sample stored in unsuitable conditions may no longer represent the cargo at discharge. Distinguish commercial quality certificates from statutory safety sampling and customs testing. If a buyer claims a contractual dry-weight shortage, the calculations should disclose each moisture figure and the agreed formula. Do not invent a universal percentage adjustment applicable to all materials. The court may require technical experts to determine the evidential weight of competing sampling methods.

Use Article 1184 for examination before accepting delivery

Turkish Commercial Code Article 1184 expressly addresses examination of the condition, measurement, number or weight of cargo before the consignee receives it. Depending on the facts, the carrier, master or consignee may seek examination by a court, competent authority or authorised experts; the statutory provision also addresses attendance and costs. This makes it important to act while the material, shipboard holds and measuring equipment remain available. A unilateral spreadsheet prepared after the cargo was consumed cannot recreate every physical observation. The inspection request should describe the goods, location, competing measurements and people who should be invited. Its purpose is to establish evidence, not to obtain an advance declaration of liability. Keep proof of the inspection notice and all underlying worksheets.

Apply Article 1185 notice rules precisely

Article 1185 generally requires written notice of apparent loss or damage no later than delivery to the consignee, while loss or damage not externally apparent may be notified within three consecutive days from delivery. Paragraph 2 recognises an exception when examination occurs through the specified joint official or authorised expert process. The statute also creates evidential presumptions if loss or damage was neither reported nor examined; those presumptions are rebuttable. The separate sixty-day written-notice rule in paragraph 5 concerns delay loss, not the ordinary apparent cargo shortage. Do not confuse these periods or imply that the three-day rule is an absolute limitation period extinguishing every substantive claim. Record the actual delivery date, physical discoverability of the shortfall, notice recipient and proof of timely transmission.

Record the exact nature of the notice and its recipient

A shortage notification should identify the vessel, voyage, bill of lading, cargo parcel, observed load and discharge figures, date and location of inspection, and the records disputed. State that the cause is under investigation rather than accusing a named worker of misconduct without evidence. Send the document through the relevant agreed and legally valid channel, retaining acknowledgments. Article 1185 contains provisions on notices given to the actual carrier or persons acting for a carrier, but this does not make every message to an unrelated freight broker sufficient. A terminal claim form may also have commercial deadlines of its own. Separate the carrier notice from a terminal complaint, customs clarification, insurer notification and buyer-seller quality dispute. Maintain a single matrix of recipients and delivery confirmations.

Watch the distinct one-year maritime claim deadline

Article 1188 of the Turkish Commercial Code establishes a one-year forfeiture period for judicial assertion of compensation claims against the carrier for cargo loss, damage and delayed delivery, subject to the provision’s specific rules. It is not interchangeable with the three-day notice regime in Article 1185, and the exact starting point must be taken from the relevant delivery or due-delivery facts. Identify the actual carrier and the person with standing; if the claim relates to terminal storage under a separate contract, its limitation regime may differ. Settlement correspondence alone should not be assumed to preserve a claim beyond a statutory period. Build a separate procedural calendar and check any applicable international convention, jurisdiction agreement and mandatory legal rule before deciding the filing strategy.

Calculate loss on the proper quantity and value basis

The claimed shortage is not always the arithmetic difference between a bill of lading quantity and the lowest later inventory measurement. Construct a transparent reconciliation ledger: declared loaded tonnes, independent loading survey, discharge draft survey, shore weighbridge net total, rejected or reprocessed cargo, retained residues and later inventory movements. Include an uncertainty column reflecting calibration tolerances and justified physical variation. Then value the proven loss under the contract and the relevant provisions, including Article 1186 where applicable. Keep acquisition invoices and evidence of market value at the legally relevant place and time. A calculation should exclude stock recovered later or sold through another channel. The amount sought must reflect actual legally provable damage and any applicable liability limitation.

Understand the weight-based limit without making it a promise

Article 1186 provides a maritime carrier liability framework using Special Drawing Rights, including rules expressed per package or unit and per kilogram of gross weight, with relevant exceptions and other statutory details. Bulk cargo generally requires careful identification of the affected quantity and the contractual cargo unit; blindly multiplying the entire shipped mass by a limit may grossly overstate the possible result. Review whether value was declared in the required manner, the wording of the sea-carriage document and Article 1187 conditions relevant to losing a limitation defence. The correct SDR conversion date and factual calculation need to be supported, not copied from a current financial market screen. A limitation calculation is only one stage of analysis; it does not establish that the carrier caused the shortage.

Do not confuse freight calculation with cargo damages

A charter party may make freight payable by bill-of-lading tonnes, loaded tonnes or another agreed measure. Turkish Commercial Code provisions governing freight calculations are not automatically the same as the rules on compensation for cargo loss. A receiver may face a freight reconciliation dispute and a separate shortage claim on the same voyage. Keep those claims in different ledgers and identify the persons bound by each contract. If a shipper invoices a quantity the buyer believes was not delivered, that raises sale-contract questions that may have different governing law and evidential burdens. A single mass discrepancy may therefore affect several legal relationships but should not be pleaded as though all defendants owed the same obligation under the same statute.

Analyse terminal and stevedore evidence separately

A stevedore’s grab spillage, hopper leakage or truck-dispatch error may be documented by the terminal’s operational systems rather than the ship’s survey. Request crane cycle and discharge totals, hopper inspection reports, spill-response reports, shift logs, truck gate records and final warehouse acceptance. Avoid attributing every event to the carrier without identifying the relevant period of custody and performance structure. A terminal operator may have a separate handling or storage agreement with the receiver; conversely, the carrier may have engaged the operator as part of carriage. The exact arrangements determine which substantive legal rules may apply. Preserve evidence from each party before pursuing a claim, but do not treat receipt of that evidence as an admission of legal responsibility.

Test the reliability of both expert reports

Independent survey reports are often treated as decisive because they contain calculations, stamps and signatures. Inspect whether each surveyor observed the relevant event personally, used calibrated equipment, documented assumptions, disclosed the original data and permitted the other party to attend. A survey company hired by one side can still provide valuable evidence, but its independence and method should be assessed on the record. For a draft survey, request hydrostatic references, water-density measurements and soundings; for a weighbridge report, obtain ticket-level exports and calibration records. If reported uncertainty is larger than the alleged shortfall, a court should be told that limitation frankly. An expert must not manufacture precision from poor-quality data simply because the invoice displays three decimal places.

Secure digital evidence without altering operational systems

Digital evidence includes terminal databases, CCTV time stamps, equipment maintenance logs, electronic signatures and weighbridge software exports. Civil Procedure Law Article 199 permits electronic information carriers to qualify as documents, but authenticity and evidential weight are distinct questions. Retain original exports with creation dates, hash values and a documented chain of custody where possible. Do not alter gate records to ‘correct’ a truck plate after the fact; record a discrepancy in a separate explanatory note. Limit access to personal data and other customers’ commercial records, and redact irrelevant material in distributed copies. A client who preserves both favourable and unfavourable entries can produce a more credible reconstruction than one who retains only selected screenshots.

Seek HMK 400–405 evidence preservation if the material is disappearing

When the vessel is about to sail, residue is being swept away or measurement data will be routinely overwritten, the requirements for court-supervised evidence preservation under Civil Procedure Law Articles 400–405 should be considered. Article 400 requires legal interest and addresses potential disappearance or substantial difficulty of proving facts. Article 401 concerns the appropriate court in pre-action cases; Article 402 concerns the application and advance expenses. Article 403 governs exceptionally urgent procedures without prior notification together with subsequent safeguards. Draft a focused request identifying what must be examined, the ship or facility location, the risk of loss, and technically answerable questions. Court evidence preservation does not itself establish the merits, contractual damages or ownership of the goods.

Prepare expert questions about source, timing and tolerance

A defensible expert mandate can ask whether both measurements relate to the same cargo parcel; whether the draft survey used the correct hydrostatic table; whether water density and ballast corrections were documented; whether weighbridge calibration was valid; and whether every truck movement is represented. The expert can then reconcile discharge and loading records, express uncertainty and identify whether a consistent physical loss remains after valid corrections. Do not request a sweeping declaration that the carrier committed fraud. That is neither a neutral technical instruction nor a proper substitute for legal assessment. Where experts disagree, request a table showing each assumption and its numerical effect so the decision-maker can identify precisely why two totals differ.

Evaluate insurance and subrogation without double recovery

Cargo insurance may cover some loss events subject to policy terms, deductibles, exclusions and proof requirements. The insurer’s surveyor may hold valuable photographs or samples, but the insured should maintain an independent evidence archive rather than rely solely on an insurer’s summary. Verify who insured the goods, when risk transferred under the sale contract, and which company can make a claim. If indemnity is paid, record subrogation or assignment rights and ensure the receiver and insurer do not claim the same loss twice. Insurance recovery does not automatically prove that a maritime carrier was liable under Article 1178. Conversely, an insurer’s refusal based on policy exclusions does not establish that no cargo shortage occurred.

Illustrative reconciliation: a numerical difference is not yet a loss

Suppose a bill of lading states 18,000 metric tonnes of ore. An arrival draft survey estimates 17,940 tonnes and the shore weighbridge totals 17,905 tonnes. These figures alone do not show that 95 tonnes disappeared at sea. The loading figure may have been shipper-declared, the shipboard estimate may use imperfect ballast correction, and truck weighbridge data may omit certain trips. Prepare separate reconciliations from the loading port to the arrival vessel and from the vessel to the terminal, with uncertainty and custody records attached. If the total after corrections still indicates physical loss, further evidence must identify when it occurred and against whom the relevant contractual and statutory claim lies. This example is a methodology, not a prediction of a legal outcome.

A practical first-day response protocol in Mersin

On the day a discrepancy is detected, appoint one person to secure legal notices and another to collect technical evidence without disrupting safe discharge. Record the cargo parcels, hatch numbers, ship and voyage identifiers, survey companies, equipment identifiers and time zones. Request original draft and weighbridge records, calibration certificates, truck movement exports, terminal receipts and any relevant preserved CCTV. Consider a timely written notice under Article 1185 and immediate examination under Article 1184, tailored to the facts. Preserve the bill of lading and charter party in their original form, identify the rights holder and calendar Article 1188 without assuming informal discussions suspend it. If evidence is at risk, assess a narrowly scoped HMK Article 400 application. Document every request and response for later expert review.

Official law, related materials and geographic accuracy

The authoritative Turkish law texts should be consulted through the Ministry of Justice’s legislation service: Law No. 6102 for maritime carriage responsibility, notices and time limits, and Law No. 6100 for documents and evidence preservation. Existing separate articles on this site cover the general one-year sea-cargo period, package/weight liability limits, sea-cargo notice procedures and clean bills of lading. Those resources do not answer this guide’s focused question about reconciling ship draft data and shore truck weights. This article is educational and does not assert a result in an actual dispute. Bakırcı & Keskin Hukuk Bürosu’s physical office for this CITY60 guide is in Mersin. Any authorised work related to a vessel, terminal or counterparty elsewhere is coordinated from Mersin according to the applicable engagement and jurisdiction rules.

Twelve frequently asked questions