What did the court affirm?
The FMC said the court fully backed its view that detention and demurrage charges must serve their intended primary purpose as incentives to improve cargo and equipment flow. In the case, Evergreen had billed a trucker for late equipment return during a holiday port closure when the trucker had no practical ability to return the container and chassis.
| Item | FMC summary |
|---|---|
| Announcement date | July 8, 2026 |
| Carrier challenged | Evergreen Shipping Agency (America) Corp. |
| Core issue | Detention billed during a three-day port closure |
| Court outcome | FMC decision upheld; fees must promote freight fluidity |
Why is this important beyond one carrier dispute?
Because it strengthens the operational logic behind detention billing disputes. This is not just a paperwork ruling. It reinforces that carriers cannot lean only on fee schedules when the real-world facts show the shipper or trucker had no practical way to move or return equipment.
Does this reduce detention risk immediately?
Not automatically. Carriers can still invoice, and disputes can still be slow. But it gives truckers, importers, and intermediaries a stronger enforcement reference when arguing that a fee did not actually incentivize movement and therefore should not stand.
What Shippers Should Do
- Preserve appointment records, closure notices, and return-attempt evidence whenever detention risk is building.
- Challenge invoices more confidently when equipment return was impossible for reasons outside your control.
- Ask drayage providers to document terminal-closure timing and unsuccessful return attempts in writing.
- Treat this ruling as a compliance tool that strengthens invoice disputes, not as a guarantee that carriers will stop billing first.