Samsung seeks $186M from CMA CGM in container charges dispute

Samsung Electronics America is seeking at least $186 million from CMA CGM in a Federal Maritime Commission complaint alleging the ocean carrier imposed unlawful container charges and failed to fulfill inland transportation commitments. The French carrier disputes the allegations and has asked the commission to dismiss the case.

The dispute centers on “store-door” shipments, under which CMA CGM agreed to transport Samsung’s containers from overseas origins through U. S. ports to designated inland destinations.

Samsung argues that the carrier passed along costs arising from delays in transportation it was responsible for arranging, while requiring the electronics company to take over parts of the delivery process. According to the complaint, CMA CGM began handling Samsung containers under store-door bills of lading in January 2020.

Samsung alleges that, beginning around the middle of that year, the carrier repeatedly failed to remove containers promptly from marine and intermodal terminals and deliver them to their inland destinations.

Samsung says it paid more than 121,000 demurrage, detention and associated charges, including more than 26,000 individual demurrage charges and over 94,000 detention-type charges. The company alleges that the bills resulted from delays outside its control.

The requested reparations include approximately $148 million in disputed demurrage, detention, rail storage and related charges and costs; at least $8. 1 million in additional expenses incurred carrying out inland transportation obligations and mitigating disruptions; and approximately $30 million in prejudgment interest.

Samsung also seeks other compensation, including legal fees, meaning its total demand could exceed $186 million.

Samsung challenges cargo holds and delivery changes Samsung alleges that CMA CGM used cargo and finance holds to compel payment of disputed invoices, sometimes withholding the movement, release or delivery of containers unrelated to the charges in dispute.

The company also accuses CMA CGM of converting some store-door shipments to container-yard arrangements without its approval. Those changes left Samsung responsible for arranging inland transportation that it says CMA CGM had already agreed to provide.

One example cited in the complaint involves a container shipped from Busan, South Korea, through the Port of Long Beach to The Colony, Texas, in 2021. Samsung alleges that the container accumulated approximately $162,800 in rail storage charges after its delivery arrangement was changed from store-door to container-yard service.

Samsung contends the carrier’s conduct violated Section 41102(c) of the Shipping Act, which requires common carriers to establish and follow just and reasonable practices related to receiving, handling, storing and delivering cargo. It is asking the FMC to award reparations and order CMA CGM to cease the allegedly unlawful practices.

CMA CGM disputes liability CMA CGM has characterized the dispute as arising from the exceptional operating conditions of the Covid-19 pandemic and maintains that it complied with its contractual obligations and applicable regulations.

“CMA CGM disputes Samsung Electronics America’s allegations of Shipping Act violations and has filed its response with the Federal Maritime Commission, requesting dismissal of the complaint,” a company representative said in an email to FreightWaves. “CMA CGM’s position is set out in its filing.

As the proceedings are ongoing, we will not comment further on the substance of the dispute.” This article was updated Oct. 8 to add comment from CMA CGM. Read more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Read more: Zim lifts profit forecast 72% on strong demand New submarine plant planned at Baltimore multimodal hub Xeneta: US-bound container rates peak, but sharp collapse unlikely DP World plots US port comeback with Corpus Christi container terminal Dockworkers protest at Port of Vancouver over automation, AI The post Samsung seeks $186M from CMA CGM in container charges dispute appeared first on FreightWaves.