Unless the contract, the circumstances or trade custom say otherwise, the sender must load the goods onto the vehicle, stack, lash and secure them in a way that suits safe carriage, and the carrier must separately ensure that the loading suits safe operation (Commercial Code 863/1). How the containers were arranged is the sender's question; whether the vehicle may leave with that stack is the driver's.
When the dispute hardens, Article 878 decides. Paragraph 1(c) releases the carrier from liability where the damage can be attributed to the goods being loaded by the sender or the consignee. Paragraph 2 presumes the damage came from that cause where the circumstances make it plausible; the sender cannot simply say 'the stack was fine, the damage happened on the road', and must put forward its own evidence. The sub-paragraph names only the sender and the consignee as the loading party: if a hired loading crew or a warehouse operator loaded, the contract decides.
| Matter | Who | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Loading, stacking, lashing, securing | Sender | Commercial Code Art. 863/1 |
| Loading suits safe operation | Carrier | Commercial Code Art. 863/1 |
| Presumption for damage from the sender's loading | Counter-evidence with the sender | Commercial Code Art. 878/1-c and 878/2 |
| Keeping the goods in the condition received | Certificate holder | Road Transport Regulation Art. 40/9 |
The record starts at the ramp. Before the doors close, photograph the whole stack once from the door, then each tier separately, then once more as the flaps come down; keep the frames in a shared folder named with the trip number that both sides can open. A driver's note that the load was loaded by the customer says who did the work but does not satisfy the driver's own duty; a specific objection is needed, naming which tier shifted or which gap was left unlashed. The signature under the consignment note creates the presumption that the goods were taken over in good condition and in line with the entries (858/2); it does not confirm that the stack was built correctly.
Put the layout in writing too. WHO TRS 961 Annex 9, clause 6.8.3 asks that qualification of an insulated passive container include full details of the packaging assembly, the minimum and maximum volume, weight and thermal mass that can safely be accommodated, and where the sensors go. The text was written for pharmaceutical transport and does not bind meal distribution, but the method carries over: the container's capacity is measured and written down once, and every trip refers to that page.
Settling the container layout at the ramp once is the cheapest move in a central kitchen distribution setup.
For a business that loads its own goods, both the work and the proof sit with the sender. A photograph showing the plan was followed also shows exactly where any shortfall lies.
