Interlegal, jointly with Georgian office, drafted legal opinion upon lawfulness of customs office actions

The Client, Georgian freight forwarder, applied to Interlegal upon analyzing lawfulness of customs office and customs warehouse actions aimed at cargo issue and delivery to the actual Consignee who violated its contractual obligations.

The Consignor and the Consignee concluded the contract on goods (shovel) supply from China to Georgia. To perform the contract, the Consignor nominated the Client in order to organize and to support cargo delivery to the destination point. The Client, as agent and freight forwarder, organized cargo delivery to Poti by sea, followed by delivery to Tbilisi customs warehouse by road. Cargo temporary import to Georgian customs territory was granted at the moment of arrival in Poti.

Having placed cargo to customs warehouse, the Client got the status of depositor. But the actual Consignee performed cargo customs clearance in the Import regime. Based on original customs waybill, customs warehouse delivered cargo to the actual Consignee without notifying the Client and without the latter’s consent, while the actual Buyer failed to make full payment to the Consignor for cargo delivery.

Interlegal Ukrainian and Georgian lawyers, having analyzed documents and having assessed the current situation, drafted legal opinion upon lawfulness of customs office and customs warehouse actions aimed at cargo delivery to the actual Consignee, provided recommendations how to avoid further similar situations regarding cargo and highlighted prospects upon damage recovery from the actual Consignee in the Client’s interests.

Interlegal Georgian partners Valerian Imnaishvili and Paata Kopaleishvili, associate attorney Ellina Romanova, lawyer Irina Yakimovskaya, managed by senior associate Karyna Gorovaya, led the case.