Short Shipment from a Chinese Supplier: Proving Missing Goods and Choosing a Remedy

Receiving a shipment does not settle whether the supplier delivered the agreed quantity. A foreign buyer may receive every carton listed on a transport document but discover fewer units inside. The useful starting point is to reconcile what was due, what was loaded and what arrived, then notify the seller promptly and choose a remedy supported by the contract and applicable law.

This guide concerns business purchases of goods from a Chinese supplier. It addresses missing quantities within a delivery, rather than an order for which nothing has arrived. The applicable sales law, delivery terms and dispute-resolution clause need to be checked before making a demand.

1. Establish the shortage and where it occurred

Compare the purchase order, accepted specifications and amendments using the same unit: pieces, sets, cartons, net weight or another agreed measure. Confirm units per carton, any agreed tolerance, and whether the seller was entitled to make scheduled partial deliveries. A balance that is not yet due is different from an overdue missing quantity.

Separate a supplier that packed too few goods from goods lost after a complete handover to a carrier or warehouse. Contractual delivery and risk terms, custody records and the cause of the loss matter. Under CISG Articles 66–67, risk transfer can affect who bears an accidental transit loss; it does not automatically excuse loss attributable to the seller. Where Chinese domestic sales law governs, Civil Code Articles 604 and 611 likewise require risk allocation and the seller’s breach obligations to be considered separately.

Record broken seals, damaged packaging and discrepancies at each handover. A possible claim against a carrier or insurer has its own contractual and legal requirements, including notice deadlines. A complaint to the supplier should not be assumed to preserve those separate claims.

2. Build a quantity reconciliation with five evidence groups

Evidence group	What it should establish
Contract quantity	The agreed unit, number due for this shipment, packing requirements, tolerance and any approved change or delivery schedule.
Packing and loading	Carton numbers, packing records, loading photographs, seal records and reliable weight measurements linked to the particular batch.
Arrival and recount	Contemporaneous unloading or opening records, carton labels, counted units, packaging condition, date, place and people present.
Custody transfers	Carrier and warehouse receipts, exceptions noted at handover, and the movement of goods before the shortage was discovered.
Notice and money	The seller’s responses, notice transmission records, payments, credits, and documents supporting any additional loss claimed.

A packing list, invoice or customs declaration records stated quantities; by itself it does not prove the contents physically loaded into each carton. If weight supports the claim, reconcile gross weight, packaging weight, measurement units, equipment reliability and permitted tolerances. A sample count should not be presented as a complete recount without explaining the sampling method and its limits.

Retain original photographs and video files, labels, relevant packaging and the recount worksheet. Do not recreate an opening scene and describe it as contemporaneous evidence. If goods must be used or moved, first document their condition and count. An independent inspection may help where the amount and evidential dispute justify it.

3. Give a specific quantity notice promptly

Identify the order and batch, quantities due and received, the disputed difference, discovery date and counting method. Attach available supporting records, ask the supplier to reconcile its loading evidence, and state the requested response or remedy. Preserve evidence of transmission and the response. Do not wait for a final loss calculation before reporting an already identified shortage.

Where the CISG applies, Article 35 includes contractual quantity in conformity obligations. Articles 38–39 require examination within the practicable period in the circumstances and a notice specifying the non-conformity within a reasonable time after discovery or when it should have been discovered. The two-year outer limit in Article 39 is not permission to wait two years; contractual guarantees and the distinct exceptions in Articles 40 and 44 require separate analysis. Article 44 is limited relief for a reasonable excuse, not a general extension of every deadline.

Where Chinese domestic law governs, Civil Code Articles 620–622 address inspection, agreed or reasonable notification periods and their qualifications. Under Article 623, if no inspection period was agreed, a signed delivery or confirmation document stating quantity, model and specifications creates a rebuttable presumption of inspection of quantity and apparent defects. A signature is therefore important evidence, but not invariably the end of a shortage claim. See the related inspection and notice guide.

4. Choose a remedy for the missing part before demanding a full refund

First identify the governing rules. The CISG may apply to a qualifying sale between parties with places of business in different Contracting States, subject to its scope, reservations and any effective exclusion. China retains its declaration concerning Article 1(1)(b). Neither a Chinese supplier nor a reference to Chinese law, considered alone, settles every applicability question.

For a delivery missing a separable part, CISG Article 51 directs attention to Articles 46–50 for that part. Depending on their conditions, the buyer may require delivery of the missing goods or fix a reasonable additional period under Article 47. For non-delivery of that part, expiry of a properly fixed period, or refusal to deliver within it, can support partial avoidance under Articles 49(1)(b) and 51. Sending a deadline does not itself complete every step: an avoidance declaration and the applicable timing requirements must also be addressed. Specific performance before a court is also subject to Article 28.

Avoidance of the whole contract under Article 51(2) requires a fundamental breach of the whole contract under Article 25. A numerical shortage, such as 20%, does not alone establish that test. Consider whether the delivered goods can be used independently and what the supplier knew about the contractual purpose. An integrated machine or an agreed indivisible package may require a different analysis from separately usable units. The UNCITRAL Digest, commentary on Article 51, discusses the significance of separable performance.

Under Chinese domestic law, Articles 577 and 580 govern continued performance and its limits; Articles 563, 565 and 566 govern statutory termination, notice and consequences. A shortage does not automatically create a right to cancel the entire order and keep all delivered goods while reclaiming the entire price. A negotiated refund or credit should identify the affected quantity, amount, payment date and claims being settled.

5. Calculate the missing quantity separately from additional losses

Hypothetical example: a buyer prepays USD 20,000 for 1,000 separately usable units at USD 20 each, but receives 800. The missing 200 units correspond to USD 4,000 at the agreed unit price. That is a reconciliation starting point, not an automatic award. A repayment demand still needs a legal or agreed basis, such as valid avoidance of the missing part or a refund settlement, and evidence that the seller bears responsibility.

If the buyer keeps the 800 conforming units, their allocated price is USD 16,000. A demand for the full USD 20,000 requires a different basis and consideration of return or restitution obligations. The buyer should not seek both later delivery of the missing 200 units and repayment of their price as cumulative compensation for the same shortfall.

Inspection costs, reasonable replacement costs, freight and other losses need separate supporting documents, causation and the applicable foreseeability and mitigation analysis: see CISG Articles 74 and 77 or Civil Code Articles 584 and 591, as applicable. Account for credits, recovered goods and any overlap. Do not automatically multiply a unit price that includes unallocated transport or tax components. The replacement-purchase guide explains the separate conditions for a price-difference claim.

6. Prepare a focused review before escalation in China

A useful first review connects the quantity reconciliation, delivery and risk terms, notice timeline, remedy sought, agreed court or arbitration clause and available enforcement information. Preserve the actual Chinese contracting entity’s name and the relationship between the supplier, payee and shipping parties; they are not necessarily the same entity.

For an initial enquiry, provide the parties’ names for conflict checking, the goods and missing quantity, amount involved, key delivery dates, available contract and notice records, and any approaching deadline. After conflict and matter checks, the proposed work, required documents, fees and engagement arrangements can be discussed before representation begins. Do not assume that sending an enquiry itself creates an engagement.

Cross-border business dispute services · Contact and initial information · panjianxing46@gmail.com

Sources and review date: reviewed 28 September 2026. CISG official text, particularly Articles 1, 6, 25–28, 35, 38–40, 44, 46–51, 66–67, 74, 77 and 81; UNCITRAL status and declarations (entry into force for China: 1 January 1988); Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China (effective 1 January 2021); and SPC Interpretation on International Treaties and International Usages, Fa Shi [2023] No. 15 (effective 1 January 2024), Articles 1 and 3. The Digest is an interpretive research aid, not a replacement for the treaty or the facts of a particular case.

General information, not a conclusion on any particular contract. The example is hypothetical. The cover is an AI-generated conceptual illustration, not a photograph of an actual client, case or shipment.