Samsung Electronics America has lodged a complaint with the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) seeking at least $186 million from CMA CGM, claiming the French ocean carrier levied unlawful container charges and didn’t meet inland transportation commitments.
CMA CGM denies the allegations and has asked the commission to dismiss Samsung’s complaint.
The matter involves so-called “store-door” shipments under which CMA CGM had agreed to transport Samsung containers from overseas origins, through U.S. ports and on to specified inland destinations. Samsung said the carrier then passed on the cost of delays in shipping, for which it was responsible, and also forced Samsung to share some of the blame for the delivery process.
Samsung alleged that CMA CGM began moving its containers on store-door bills of lading in January 2020. The electronics company says that starting in or around mid-2021, CMA CGM routinely failed to remove containers from marine and intermodal terminals and deliver them to their designated inland destinations in a timely fashion.
Samsung said it ended up paying more than $121,000 in demurrage, detention and related charges. They included more than 26,000 individual demurrage charges and more than 94,000 detention-type charges. The company said the bills were incurred due to delays outside of its control.
The compensation sought by Samsung includes about $148 million in disputed demurrage, detention, rail storage and other related charges and costs. It also is seeking at least $8.1 million for other costs it has incurred in performing its inland transportation obligations and responding to disruptions and about $30 million in prejudgment interest.
Samsung is also asking for other forms of compensation, including legal fees, that could push its total claim to over $186 million.
Samsung alters delivery arrangements, disputes cargo holds
Samsung also says CMA CGM is using cargo and financial holds to force it to pay disputed invoices. At times, the carrier withheld movement, release or delivery of containers not themselves connected to the charges under dispute, the complaint said.
The electronics firm also says CMA CGM altered some store-door moves to container-yard setups without Samsung’s approval. That meant Samsung had to take over inland transportation that the carrier had agreed to previously, Samsung said.
Samsung, for example, described a container that left Busan, South Korea, passed through the Port of Long Beach and was ultimately headed to The Colony, Texas in 2021.
Samsung said the container accrued some $162,800 in rail storage fees because its delivery service was changed from a store-door service to a container-yard service.
The company argues that CMA CGM violated Section 41102(c) of the Shipping Act. The provision mandates that common carriers adopt and adhere to just and reasonable practices for the receipt, handling, storage and delivery of cargo.
Samsung has asked the FMC to order reparations and to order CMA CGM to cease practices it deems unlawful.
CMA CGM cites pandemic-era operating conditions
CMA CGM denies liability and has framed the dispute against the backdrop of the exceptional operating environment created by the Covid-19 pandemic.
The carrier says it fulfilled its contractual obligations and followed the rules governing its operations.
