Actualizacion

El Tribunal Superior de Antioquia, despues de 25 anos de burla por parte del sistema judicial Colombiano, reconocio que nosostros si somos las victimas y que si somos debido el flete y perjuicios. Claro, eso era obvio, pero entonces procedio a inventar una obligacion por parte del armador a rematar la carga despues de solo 30 dias de no ser cancelado el flete; Incorrecto, la ley otorga el derecho al armador a vender la propiedad despues de 30 dias, no obliga a hacerlo. Ademas, esa carga no era la que decia la documentacion, era asi como la Caja Agraria defraudaba a la Nacion, comprando material de mucho menor calidad y cobrando por otro, pero eso si no le intereso a estos supuestamente honorables jueces.


Entendemos que nuestro caso esta ahora en manos del Magistrado de la Corte Suprema Valencia Copete; veremos que dictamen tendra el recurso de casacion aceptado desde Noviembre 5, 2008.

Update

The appeals court in Medellin (Sala Civil Tribunal Superior de Antioquia) finally, after 25 years, admitted that we were not at fault and that, indeed, we were owed the transportation and other fees overturning the lower court's 13-years-after-the-fact decision which was comletely against us and had even ordered us to pay for the costs of the judicial process and attorney fees for the defendants.

The appeals court also went out of its way to invent an alleged obligation on our part claiming that we were required by law to dispose of the cargo 30 days after non-payment and accused us of negligence. Our appeal to the Colombian Supreme Court, Justice Copete Valencia's is the lead Justice on the appeal, includes the legal analysis done by Universidad de los Andes Maritime Law professor Ricardo Velez, shows that the law does not impose an obligation on the carrier to sell the goods nor is there any jurisprudence willing to go along with the Court of Appeals' legal fiction; the true intent was to reduce the amount of damages to an amount of less than $100,000 dollars. Perverse.

Our appeal to the Supreme Court also detailed why the parties had accepted the multimodal transportation contract (the Colombian government agency knew every step pf the way of the cargo on its way, the Cash on Delivery stipulation of the contrcat their agent signed, and even gave us a check which bounced; how can they then claim they didn't accept the contract?

Again our contract included the USA Clause Paramount which means that the contract was valid under US law as the shipment originated from Tampa. The law also states:

The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act of Congress also reads, in part:

§ 1304. Rights and immunities of carrier and ship 

Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be responsible for loss or damage arising or resulting from-- 

i. Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods, his agent or representative

Enough. The never ending saga of Colombian government corruption and criminality  continues.

The legal analysis of Dr. Ricardo Velez can be viewed here:

http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddjd6f6x_183g34kzzf9

Yolanda de Zakzuk

and family

6/17/09