INCOTERMS (CIF) CASE A contract of sale was entered between an American company,

INCOTERMS (CIF) CASE
A contract of sale was entered between an American company, BAT, Inc., of Calumet City, Illinois (buyer), and a German scientific equipment manufacturing firm, Tola (seller), for the sale of a mobile MRI. Tola sent the requested MRI machine to buyer aboard the ship, Superior Carrier, in good working condition. However, when it reached its final destination, it had been damaged and was in need of extensive repair. The buyer and its insurance company believe that the MRI was damaged in transit. BAT’s insurance company, St. Guardian Insurance, covered the cost of the damage, which was $350,000. In turn, the insurance company intends to recover from Tola. However, Tola claims that, since the goods were shipped under CIF (New York) term, they were under no obligation for the loss, that is, its contractual obligation with regard to risk of loss ended when it delivered the machine to the vessel at the port of shipment. The buyer (its insurance company) contends that Incoterms were inapplicable since they were not specifically incorporated into the contract. They also argue that the seller’s explicit retention of title modified the risk of loss.
Question
Do you agree with BAT and St. Guardian Insurance? Why/why not?

INCOTERMS (CIF) CASE A contract of sale was entered between an American company,
Scroll to top