Our client, the Gold Bond Group, achieved a significant and precedent-setting victory before the Supreme Court of Israel in a ruling that, for the first time, clarifies the scope of application of the Hague Rules regarding limitation periods for maritime claims.
The Supreme Court denied a motion for leave to appeal filed by Maersk, the maritime carrier, and upheld the arguments raised by Gold Bond—represented by Attorneys Joseph Benkel, Nir Shamri, and Aviv Sheizaf—that the one-year limitation period set forth in the Hague Rules applies exclusively to direct parties to the bill of lading or their legal successors, and not to third parties.
The case concerned a lawsuit filed by Orda Print against Gold Bond, alleging damage to a printing machine imported from Japan. Gold Bond, which was responsible for transporting the cargo, filed a third-party notice against Maersk, asserting joint liability for the damage.
Maersk sought to have the third-party claim dismissed based on the one-year limitation period prescribed by the Hague Rules, arguing that it applied to all claims against a maritime carrier. This argument was rejected first by the District Court and subsequently by the Supreme Court, which set a new and important legal precedent in the field.
This ruling marks a key milestone in maritime transportation law and provides clear guidance regarding the applicability of limitation periods to third-party claims.
(For further reading, see Supreme Court decision in case no. 55481-09-24 Maersk A/S v. Gold Bond Group Ltd.).
