Incorrect cargo declaration led to serious damage to Malaysia Airlines plane in 2000

A chemical leak from cargo on board a Malaysia Airlines A330 plane en route from Beijing to Chennai in 2000 caused such extensive damage that the plane was deemed unfit for future use. The cargo reportedly had been inaccurately declared.

The website flightglobal.com, reported in 2007 that a Chinese court had ordered a state-owned company to pay more than US$65m in compensation to five insurers over an incident in 2000.

Eighty canisters of chemicals were being transported from Beijing to Chennai on a Malaysia Airlines Airbus A330-300.

“Five airport workers fell ill as they were unloading baggage from the A330 at Kuala Lumpur International Airport after one or more of the canisters leaked and chemicals spilled into the aircraft’s cargo hold, resulting in extensive corrosion damage to the fuselage, wing box structure and landing gear.”

The website further noted: “The official reports say the company’s shipment had been declared as a non-toxic solid substance known as hydroxyquinoline when in fact it was a corrosive liquid substance known as oxalyl chloride.”

Note below that they had earlier failed to get Singapore Airlines to transport the cargo.

China Daily also reported:

In February 2000, China Chemical Construction Corporation Dalian Branch appointed Tianhang Group and Beijing Profit Sail International Express Company as its agents, and signed a contract with Singapore Airlines to transport a number of chemical products from Beijing to Madras in India.

The Dalian company later chartered a Malaysia Airlines plane to transport the cargo, after it failed to secure planes from Singapore Airlines.

In March 2000, when the scheduled Malaysia Airlines flight arrived at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport, the unloading personnel found the chemicals were liquid, which was different goods from the customs clearance they had received.

“The liquid chemicals were leaking and were harmful to humans. The aircraft had been seriously damaged by corrosion,” said the SPC verdict.

After an evaluation of the plane’s condition, Airbus said that repairs would cost at least $89 million – and even then there would be no guarantee that the plane could be safely flown. Airbus concluded that there was no point in repairing the aircraft.

Two insurance companies paid $95 million to Malaysia Airlines for insurance compensation.

In 2002, Malaysia Airlines and the insurance companies involved sued the CNCCC Dalian branch, its appointed freight logistics agents and the customs authority in the Beijing High People’s Court, requesting that they assume full responsibility and compensate for the economic losses.

The first ruling of the Beijing High People’s Court said the Dalian company would assume responsibility, and compensate Malaysia Airlines with $65 million.

In 2012, Malaysia Airlines appealed to the Supreme People’s Court.

Judges found the workload to be huge, as both sides provided assessment reports filed by more than 20 organizations and companies. After spending days verifying the facts, the Supreme People’s Court made a final ruling at the end of last year, deciding that the CNCCC Dalian branch and the customs authority should share the responsibilities and compensate the Malaysia side for the economic losses up to $65.78 million.

What this case shows is that we should not accept at face value what is stated in shipping documents unless the cargo has been thoroughly inspected and verified by independent parties.

(Thanks to blog visitor hoeyoonchang for the heads-up on this.)