Amends procedures to allow for Isle of Man having signed the Hague Convention. Citations: Gazette 15-Feb-1995 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Children Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.80456
A decision to segregate a prisoner under rule 43 is to be made by the governor of the prison where he is held. Taylor LJ said: ‘Apart from the urgency of decisions under r 43, there may well be other public policy grounds for not giving reasons in advance to the prisoner so as to … Continue reading Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague: CA 5 Jun 1990
A prisoner challenged the decision that he should be segregated under rule 43. Held: Ralph Gibson LJ said: ‘In this case Mr Sedley acknowledged that there could not be an unqualified obligation in all cases upon the governor to allow the right to be heard. There may be cases of urgency. We would add that … Continue reading Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: QBD 1990
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to authorise the segregation of a prisoner on his arrival at another prison to … Continue reading Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: HL 24 Jul 1991
Arbitration application under which the applicants seek a declaration that arbitration was commenced prior to the expiry of the one year time limit contained in Article III, r.6 of the Hague Rules and in the alternative an order extending time for the commencement of arbitration. Judges: The Hon Mr Justice Moore-Bick Citations: [1998] EWHC 1207 … Continue reading Allianz Versicherungs Ag v Fortuna Co Inc (The Baltic Universal): ComC 27 Oct 1998
Even though a shipowner who had carried cargo on deck was not entitled to rely on the exceptions to liability in his contract, a limitation clause was different and should not be construed by reference to the specially exacting standards applicable to exclusion and indemnity clauses. The words of exclusion must be clear and unambiguous, … Continue reading Ailsa Craig Fishing Co Ltd v Malvern Fishing Co Ltd: HL 26 Nov 1981
The applicants had a business processing whelks. After the loss of the Sea Empress, an order was made prohibiting the sale of seafood from the area. They appealed a refusal of compensation for their losses. The respondents would be liable to make recompense if the loss could be said to be ‘damage caused by contamination … Continue reading R J Tilbury and Sons (Devon) Ltd t/A East Devon Shellfish v Alegrete Shipping Co Inc (Owners of the Ship ‘Sea Empress’), Assurance Foreningen Skuld (Gjensidig) and the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund 1971: CA 7 Feb 2003
Liability under the Hague Convention is limited by the number of cargo packets where so listed, and not by the number of containers. Citations: Gazette 03-Sep-1997, Times 29-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2105, [1998] QB 610, [1997] 4 All ER 498, [1997] 3 WLR 1128, [1998] 1 Lloyds Rep 225, [1996] 2 Lloyds Rep 530 Links: … Continue reading Owners of Cargo Lately Laden Aboard the River Gurara v Nigerian National Shipping Line Limited: CA 29 Jul 1997
The claimant advanced funds to the respondent for him to invest in a bank of which the claimant had insider knowledge. In fact the defendant did not invest the funds, the knowledge was incorrect. The defendant however did not return the sums advanced, saying he need not return it because the contract was for an … Continue reading Patel v Mirza: SC 20 Jul 2016
The claimants had installed glass tiles in a roof. They fractured, and facing a claim for damages, they sought payment from their insurers. The claimants argued that the risk of fracture meant that the damage occurred upon installation, the insurers contended that liability arose only as tiles broke. Held: To construe the insuring clause as … Continue reading Pilkington United Kingdom Limited v CGU Insurance Plc: QBD 28 Jan 2004
The carrier had loaded the cargo on the ship’s deck, despite a clause requiring it to be stowed in a hold. The charterparty sought to use the breach to remove the carrier’s limit of liability. The older form of Hague rules applied. Held: It was not yet decided that the wharehouse and deviation case law … Continue reading Daewoo Heavy Industries Ltd and Another v Klipriver Shipping Ltd and Another: CA 3 Apr 2003
Scrutton LJ said: ‘If you undertake to do a thing in a certain way, or to keep a thing in a certain place, with certain conditions protecting it, and have broken the contract by not doing the thing contracted for in the way contracted for, or not keeping the article in the place in which … Continue reading Gibaud v Great Eastern Railway Co: CA 1921
The shipment was of men’s clothing carried pursuant to a consignment note and receipt stamped ‘Non-negotiable’. The consignment note named consignees in Scotland and stated: ‘Please receive for forwarding per Burns and Laird Lines’ steamers the undernoted goods . .’ These documents were retained by the shipper. The goods were damaged and the shipper claimed … Continue reading Hugh Mack and Co Ltd v Burns and Laird Lines Ltd: 1944
Judges: Langley J Citations: [2002] EWHC 1306 (Comm) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Not followed – The Chanda ChD 1989 Part of an asphalt drying and mixing plant had been shipped on deck in breach of contract. The court asked whether the shipment on deck disentitled the shipowner from relying on Article IV rule 5. … Continue reading Daewoo Heavy Industries Ltd and Another v Klipriver Shipping Ltd and Another: ChD 2002
Part of an asphalt drying and mixing plant had been shipped on deck in breach of contract. The court asked whether the shipment on deck disentitled the shipowner from relying on Article IV rule 5. Held: A carrier by sea, who carries cargo on deck in breach of a contract of carriage which is governed … Continue reading The Chanda: ChD 1989
The claimant sought to begin proceedings to renew his business tenancy, but the proceedings were issued in the wrong name. He sought to amend the proceedings to substitute the correct defendant, but that application was out of time. Held: Proceedings under the 1954 Act were not within the proceedings listed by CPR 19.5 since the … Continue reading Parsons and Another v George and Another: CA 13 Jul 2004
ComC Reference to arbitration to be within 30 days of completion of voyage – whether incorporated into charterparty – whether barring any further claim in court – whether express arbitration clause to prevail over Hague Rules, Article III, rule 6 incorporated by clause paramount. Judges: Longmore J Citations: [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 632, [1997] CLC … Continue reading Metalfer Corporation v Pan Ocean Shipping Co Ltd: ComC 7 Oct 1997
ComC Time trip – clause paramount – incorporation of Hague Rules or Hague-Visby Rules Judges: Thomas J Citations: [1997] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 744;, [1998] CLY 4412 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Transport Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.220779
Although section 3(1) of the 1934 Act expressly empowered only courts of record to include interest in sums for which judgment was given for damages or debt, arbitrators were nevertheless empowered by the agreement of reference to apply English law, including so much of that law as is to be found in the section. The … Continue reading Chandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller Co Inc: CA 1950
An insurance clause ensuring ‘loss or damage in connexion with the goods’ under the Hague Rules for carriage of goods by sea includes economic loss even in the absence of such physical damage. Judges: Pearson J Citations: [1958] 1 QB 74 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Pilkington United Kingdom Limited v CGU … Continue reading Goulandris Bros v Goldmann and Sons: 1958
Where the terms of a statute are incorporated into a contract by reference, the contract has to be read as if the words of the statute are written out in the contract and construed, as a matter of contract, in that contractual context. The Hague Rules applied to ballast voyages: ‘My Lords, it is, I … Continue reading Adamastos Shipping v Anglo Saxon Petroleum: HL 1959
The Cargo limitation of liability restriction applies to separate items not to the container units as a whole. Citations: Times 06-Mar-1996 Statutes: Hague Rules 1922 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed to – Owners of Cargo Lately Laden Aboard the River Gurara v Nigerian National Shipping Line Limited CA 29-Jul-1997 Liability under the Hague Convention … Continue reading Owners of Cargo Lately Aboard the River Gurara v Nigerian National Shipping Line: QBD 6 Mar 1996
A carrier’s right to an indemnity for damage resulting from the transport of dangerous goods, does not depend on whether the shipper knew of the dangerous nature and character of the goods or was at fault in permitting their shipment or not warning the carrier of their dangerous nature. Judge Diamond, QC identified what a … Continue reading Mediterranean Freight Services Ltd v BP Oil International Ltd (The Fiona): 1993
Mr Holmes was killed when the defendant’s aircraft in which he was a passenger crashed on a domestic flight in Bangladesh. As a domestic flight, it was not international carriage. The proper law of the contract was undoubtedly Bangladeshi law. Under Bangladeshi law the plaintiff’s damages would have been limited to andpound;913. But Mr Holmes’s … Continue reading Holmes v Bangladesh Biman Corporation: HL 1989
(Nova Scotia) Goods were shipped from Newfoundland under a bill of lading which contained an exemption for loss caused by the servants of the carrier. This exemption was void by the law of Newfoundland, whose legislature had enacted the Hague Rules, but the action was brought in Nova Scotia where the courts had to apply … Continue reading Vita Food Products Inc v Unus Shipping Co Ltd: PC 30 Jan 1939
Ex turpi causa explained The parties had disputed the validity a patent and the production of infringing preparations. The english patent had failed and damages were to be awarded, but a Canadian patent remained the defendant now challenged the calculation of damages for what it said would have been an infringing trade, and pleaded ex … Continue reading Les Laboratoires Servier and Another v Apotex Inc and Others: SC 29 Oct 2014
A writ was issued against defendants ‘O’ who had been owners of the Jay Bola, just prior to the expiry of the one year time bar under the Hague Rules. The judge laid emphasis on the fact that Article 6 III r.6 discharged from all liability unless suit was brought within a year. ‘O’ had … Continue reading The Jay Bola: 1992
THe effect of article IX is to make plain that what article IV rule 5 refers to is the gold value of the pound sterling not its nominal or paper value. ‘Fortunately for carriers this result is not disastrous, as most nations where Hague Rules are still mandatorily applicable have converted the package limitation into … Continue reading The “Rosa S”: 1988
The time limit of one year contained in Article III rule 6 applied to a claim for failure to carry under deck; the package limit in Article IV rule 5 was not inherently different. Whatever may be the position with regard to deviation clauses strictly so called, which should be assimilated into the ordinary law … Continue reading The Antares: CA 1987
‘ two important issues in relation to the law of carriage of goods by sea. i) The first is whether the time bar created by Article III Rule 6 of the Hague Rules applies to claims for wrongful misdelivery, where the shipowner has delivered the cargo to a third party without production of the bill … Continue reading Deep Sea Maritime Ltd v Monjasa A/S: ComC 15 Jun 2018
Claims for freight charges are an exception to the general rule that all claims between parties must be resolved in one action. A claim for freight cannot be a claim ‘on the same grounds’ as a counter-claim for loss or damage arising out of the carriage, for there is no set off against freight. The … Continue reading Aries Tanker Corp v Total Transport Ltd; The Aries: HL 1977
The parties to a contract had agreed that the proper law for the contract was England. One party commenced proceedings in Canada, and the courts of Canada had accepted jurisdiction as the most appropriate and convenient forum to resolve the dispute. Proceedings were also begun in England, and the original Canadian claimant now appealed a … Continue reading OT Africa Line Ltd v Magic Sportswear Corporation and others: CA 13 Jun 2005
‘There are two issues in this Part 8 claim, namely whether the package limitation provisions in Article IV r.5 of the Hague Rules (‘Article IV r.5’) apply to bulk cargoes and, if they do, how they apply to the damaged cargo of fishoil with which this action is concerned. Article IV r.5 provides that the … Continue reading Vinnlustodin Hf and Another v Sea Tank Shipping As: ComC 14 Oct 2016
A US company bought a printing machine and ancillary equipment on CIF terms from an English company. The sellers consigned the goods to the buyers. The carriers were a container liner operator and the demise charterers of the vessels ‘Rosemary’ and ‘Rafaela S’. The goods were shipped from Durban aboard the ‘Rosemary,’ as evidenced by … Continue reading J I MacWilliam Company Inc v Mediterranean Shipping Company SA; The “Rafaela S”: HL 16 Feb 2005
There was a contact for the carriage by sea of three reactors. The contract applied the Hage-Visby rules. Held: The contract applied the rules as they would apply in the country of shipment if they were applied mandatorily. The contact should be read so as to reflect the clearly expressed intention of the parties. The … Continue reading Parsons Corporation and others v C V Scheepvaartonderneming ‘The Happy Ranger’: CA 17 May 2002
Viscount Sumner [1929] AC 223 England and Wales Citing: At First Instance – Gosse Millard v Canadian Government Merchant Marine 1927 Wright J said of the Hague Rules: ‘These Rules, which now have statutory force, have radically changed the legal status of sea carriers under bills of lading. According to the previous law, shipowners were … Continue reading Gosse Millard v Canadian Government Merchant Marine: HL 1929
High Court of Australia – Shipping – Sea carriage of goods – Bill of lading – Hague Rules – Damage to cargo – Cargo properly stowed – Vessel seaworthy and fit in all respects for voyage – Bad weather conditions foreseeable – Perils of the sea – MV Bunga Seroja. Gaudron, Mchugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne … Continue reading Great China Metal Industries Co Ltd v Malaysian International Shipping Corpn Bhd (The “BUNGA SEROJA”): 22 Oct 1998
The claimant appellants, arranged shipment of bagged Colombian green coffee beans, stowed in 20 unventilated 20-foot containers from Panama to Rotterdam, Hamburg or Bremerhaven for on carriage to Bremen. The bill of lading for each consignment covered the entire carriage. Such beans were commonly carried in either ventilated or unventilated containers. Unventilated containers were specified … Continue reading Volcafe Ltd and Others v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores Sa: SC 5 Dec 2018
The Hague Rules had made no difference to the incidence of the burden of proof in cases of bailment for carriage. Scrutton LJ [1930] 1 KB 416 England and Wales Citing: Applied – Gosse Millard v Canadian Government Merchant Marine 1927 Wright J said of the Hague Rules: ‘These Rules, which now have statutory force, … Continue reading Silver v Ocean Steamship Co Ltd: CA 1930
Wright J said of the Hague Rules: ‘These Rules, which now have statutory force, have radically changed the legal status of sea carriers under bills of lading. According to the previous law, shipowners were generally common carriers, or were liable to the obligations of common carriers, but they were entitled to the utmost freedom to … Continue reading Gosse Millard v Canadian Government Merchant Marine: 1927
D’s vessel was chartered to carry a cargo of Cuban sugar in bulk. She loaded some 10000 tonnes at Guayabal. Two bills of lading were issued to the shippers. On April 4th 1979 the vessel set sail for Denmark. On April 13th she encountered heavy weather and on April 14th she started to list to … Continue reading Aktieselskabet de Danske Sukkerfabrikker v Bajamar Compania Naviera SA (The “TORENIA”): 1983
A ship’s cargo can be held to be dangerous, and the shipper liable for anything which was more than an obvious physical danger. Such wider danger includes beetle infestation of a crop cargo. Lord Steyn said:’I would be quite prepared, in an appropriate case involving truly feasible alternative interpretations of a convention, to allow the … Continue reading Effort Shipping Company Ltd v Linden Management Sa and others (The Glannis Nk): HL 22 Jan 1998
No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York (Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York. Held: The appeal was allowed. There was … Continue reading Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another: PC 3 Feb 2016
Interpretation of Exclusion Clauses The plaintiffs had contracted with the defendants for the provision of a night patrol service for their factory. The perils the parties had in mind were fire and theft. A patrol man deliberately lit a fire which burned down the factory. It was an unresolved issue whether the employee intended to … Continue reading Photo Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd: HL 14 Feb 1980
PC (New Zealand) The appeal concerned the correct interpretation of a damage limitation clause in a contract for the carriage of goods by sea. Held: Clause 6(B)(b)(i) must be construed in the context of the contract as a whole. The general rule is that if a party, otherwise liable, is to exclude or limit his … Continue reading Dairy Containers Ltd v Tasman Orient Line Cv: PC 20 May 2004
No magic in the words “fundamental breach” There is no rule of law which prevents parties to a contract agreeing to limit their respective liabilities. It is a question of the construction of the particular clause as to whether it applies to a fundamental breach or not. The court doubted the value of continuing the … Continue reading Suisse Atlantique Societe d’Armement Maritime SA v NV Rotterdamsche Kolen Centrale: HL 1966
English statutes which give effect to international conventions need to be interpreted with the international origin of the rules well in mind. The Act only applies to contracts of carriage of goods outwards from ports in the United Kingdom, and the . .
Munitions were consigned to Cochin on board the defendants’ vessel. A fire occurred, and part was jettisoned, the remainder being damaged. The cargo owners first claimed damages in India for short delivery under the bills of lading for the . .
Munitions were being carried to Cochin on board the defendants’ vessel. Some was jettisoned in a fire and the remainder was damaged. The cargo owners sought damages in India for short delivery under the bills of lading, as to the jettisoned cargo . .
References: [1988] 2 Lloyds Rep 574 Coram: Hobhouse J THe effect of article IX is to make plain that what article IV rule 5 refers to is the gold value of the pound sterling not its nominal or paper value. ‘Fortunately for carriers this result is not disastrous, as most nations where Hague Rules are … Continue reading The ‘Rosa S’: 1988
Tt is the shipper or his agent who is delivering the cargo and so it is the shipper who has actual or imputed knowledge as to its condition. The shipper will or ought to know whether there is any discrepancy between the description of the cargo in the sale documents or supplier’s note and the … Continue reading re “The DAVID AGMASHENEBELI”: 2003
Judges: Burton J Citations: [2008] EWHC 1036 (Comm), [2008] 1 CLC 841, [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 166, [2008] 2 All ER (Comm) 1005 Links: Bailii Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules Jurisdiction: England and Wales Transport, Contract Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.267942
Judges: Brandon J Citations: [1977] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 416 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules III r2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract … Continue reading The Arawa: 1977
The question was whether a carrier is liable to cargo owners when the latter, or their stevedores, perform their duties improperly or carelessly; whether an agreement which transfers responsibility for these operations from the shipowners to shippers, charterers or consignees, is invalidated by article III, r. 8 of the Rules. The charterparty purported to transfer … Continue reading Jindal Iron and Steel Co Ltd and others v Islamic Solidarity Company Jordan Inc and Another: CA 13 Feb 2003
The appeal concerns the scope of the Hague and Hague-Visby Rules and their application to the carriage of goods by sea in containers. Judges: Gloster VP CA, Flaux LJJ Citations: [2018] EWCA Civ 778, [2018] WLR(D) 224, [2018] Bus LR 1481 Links: Bailii, WLRD Jurisdiction: England and Wales Transport Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.608716
A contract for shipping was subject to the Hague Visby Rules, but provided that jurisdiction was for the place where the carrier had his business, in this case in Mariupol. The question was: where an application is made under O.12 r.8 to set aside leave to serve out granted under O.11 r.1(1)(c) should the court … Continue reading BMG Trading Limited v A S Mckay Limited and Azov Shipping Company: CA 3 Oct 1997
A ship owner is to have made his ship seaworthy in order to claim an indemnity for dangerous fuel set alight by a third party. He was not entitled to claim where the failure to keep the ship seaworthy was his own.Hirst LJ said: ‘The inclusion of the words ‘directly or indirectly’ in art. IV, … Continue reading Mediterranean Freight Services Ltd v BP Oil International Ltd (The Fiona): CA 27 Jul 1994
Whether the limitation of liability in Article III, r.6 of the Hague Visby Rules applies to claims for misdelivery of cargo after discharge from the vessel. Judges: Sir William Blair (Sitting as a High Court Judge) Citations: [2022] EWHC 2400 (Comm) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Transport Updated: 13 October 2022; Ref: scu.681471
(Federal Court of Australia) ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME LAW – carriage of goods by sea – Hague-Visby Rules – Australian COGSA Art 3 Rules 3, 4 and 8 – method for assessing value of cargo – where no ‘commodity exchange price’ or ‘current market price’ – where ‘normal value’ of goods at destination not determined. ADMIRALTY … Continue reading El Greco (Australia) Pty Ltd v Mediterranean Shipping Co SA: 10 Aug 2004
The Act required the occupier of a licensed racetrack to take all steps necessary to secure that, so long as a totalisator was being lawfully operated on the track, there was available for bookmakers space on the track where they could conveniently carry on bookmaking in connection with dog races run on the track on … Continue reading Cutler v Wandsworth Stadium Ltd: HL 1949
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods were taken lawfully. Held: The segregation was not authorised by the applicable legislation: ‘rule 45 . . (1) enables the governor … Continue reading Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 29 Jul 2015
Challenge to rules requiring certain minimum levels of income (Minimum Income Requirement – MIR) for allowing entry for non-EEA spouse. Held: The challenges udder the Human Rights Act to the Rules themselves failed. Nor did any separate issue of discrimination arise under article 14. However, the appendix with instructions for entry clearance officers considering the … Continue reading MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State and Another: SC 22 Feb 2017
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia whether damages for false imprisonment were allowable under Factortame. Held: The appeals failed. Chapter 55 of the EIG … Continue reading Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 27 Nov 2019
The applcant, a girl aged 17 was in a young offender institution. She complained that she had been removed to segregation without first giving her chance to be heard. The respondent argued that there were sufficient post decision safeguards to ensure fairness. Held: Modern standards of fairnesss required that she be given opportunity to be … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v SP: CA 21 Dec 2004
Cargo was damaged by rough handling during loading and/or discharging, and/or inadequate stowage due to failure to provide dunnage, failure to secure the coils and/or stacking them so that the bottom layers were excessively compressed. The House was asked to depart from an interpretation of the rules which had stood and been applied for more … Continue reading Jindal Iron and Steel Co Ltd and others v Islamic Solidarity Shipping Company Jordan Inc (“The Jordan II”): HL 25 Nov 2004
Judges: Lord Denning MR Citations: [1976] 1 Lloyds Rep 489 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract … Continue reading The Ciechocinek: CA 1976
The court considered whether there had been effective service of proceedings on defendants in Turkey. Evidence was given as to the effectiveness of such service in Turkish law. Held: The defendant’s application to set aside the judgment in default succeeded. The claimant’s applications in respect of CPR 3.10 and CPR 6.9 were refused. The Civil … Continue reading Basil Shiblaq v Kahraman Sadikoglu (No 2): ComC 30 Jul 2004
The owners of cargo claimed damages from the carriers for a cargo of jet oil rejected at the port of destination because of contamination suffered on board. Held: In interpreting the rules, the court must adopt a process of construction which is appropriate to a set of rules agreed internationally and enacted into United Kingdom … Continue reading Trafigura Beheer Bv v Golden Stavraetos Maritime Inc: CA 15 May 2003
Machinery was damaged whilst in transit, on the second of two legs. The contract described itself as a through bill of lading, but the port of discharge was not the final destination. Held: The contract was a straight bill of lading. A straight bill of lading requires delivery of the goods to the named consignee … Continue reading J I MacWilliam Co Inc v Mediterranean Shipping Company S A, “The Rafaela S”: CA 16 Apr 2003
The court was asked whether article IV rule 2(b) of the Hague-Visby Rules is capable of exempting the carrier from liability to the cargo owner for damage caused by fire if that fire were caused deliberately or barratrously. Citations: [2019] EWCA Civ 388 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Transport Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Glencore Energy UK Ltd and Another v Freeport Holdings Ltd (The ‘Lady M’): CA 14 Mar 2019
A fire destroyed the ‘Eurasian Dream’ while in port. It was carrying cars, a fire in which got out of control. It was claimed that the ship managers had been negligent. The bill of lading contracts in the present case incorporated either the Hague or Hague-Visby Rules. Held: The vessel was unseaworthy because of deficiencies … Continue reading Papera Traders Co Limited and others v Hyundai Merchant Marine Co Limited, The Keihin Co Limited: QBD 7 Feb 2002
Mrs. Becker had started an action as trustee when she was sent to prison for obtaining credit as a bankrupt. She applied to leave prison in order to conduct her case. The Home Secretary made a direction for her production under Section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 1961 subject to her prepayment of the … Continue reading Becker v Home Office: CA 1972
The court was asked whether a cause of action arose from a breach of the Prison Rules 1933. Goddard LJ said: ‘With regard to the prison rules, it would be enough to say that there were no breaches, but, in case a higher court should take a different view, I should say that, in my … Continue reading Arbon v Anderson: 1943
The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden anally. Held: The common thread in all the cases has been the search to … Continue reading Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001
Judges: Beldam LJ Citations: [1993] 1 Lloyds Rep 1 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract of … Continue reading The Coral: CA 1993
The time limit under the Rules applied where goods had not been loaded and that time would start to run from the date when the goods ought to have been delivered. Citations: [1993] 2 Lloyds Rep 435 Statutes: Hague Visby Rules Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Trafigura Beheer Bv v Golden Stavraetos … Continue reading The Ot Sonja: CA 1993
The status of the prohibition on State torture as a rule of jus cogens has the consequence that at the inter-State level, any legislative, administrative or judicial act authorising torture is illegitimate. Furthermore, the prohibition on State torture imposes obligations owed by States erga omnes, to all other States which have a corresponding right and … Continue reading Prosecutor v Furundzija: ICT 10 Dec 1998
Judges: Steyn J Citations: [1986] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 586 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2 Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract of carriage. The effect of … Continue reading The Panaghia Tinnou: 1986
In a case where the national court which would deal with a matter was the court first seised of the matter, a stay could only be awarded where the proceedings until the proceedings were definitively pending in that court. Documents could be served by fax only if the party being served had explicitly consented to … Continue reading Molins Plc v G D Spa: CA 29 Mar 2000
Tudor-Evans J said: ‘In my judgment, the sentence of the court and the provisions of section 12(1) always afford a defence to an action of false imprisonment. The sentence justifies the fact of imprisonment and the subsection justifies the confinement of a prisoner in any prison. How then can it be unjustifiable and unlawful to … Continue reading Williams v Home Office (No 2): 1981
A literal interpretation of the Rules indicates that, where shippers and consignees select and pay for stevedoring, cargo claimants may recover compensation from owners for the negligence of cargo owners or the negligence of their stevedores, but ‘It would be an odd state of things if one were to hold that a shipowner who has … Continue reading Brys and Gylsen v J and J Drysdale and Co: 1920
Cargo was damaged in the course of a voyage by the failure of a fitter employed by ship repairers to secure the inspection cover on a storm valve. The cargo owner sued the shipowner in contract, and recovered. Held: It was no defence that the repairs had been carried out by a reputable independent contractor. … Continue reading Riverstone Meat Co Pty Ltd v Lancashire Shipping Co Ltd: HL 1961
(Practice Note) The solicitor appealed an order which made the success fee payable different at different stages of the court action. Held: The court had no power to make such an order. To the extent that the CPR might suggest otherwise they were wrong. ‘a practice direction has no legislative force. Practice directions provide invaluable … Continue reading KU (A Child) v Liverpool City Council: CA 27 Apr 2005
The father had applied for a summary order requiring the return of the daughter to Israel. The Court was asked to consider whether the Court of Appeal, having determined that such an order could not be granted under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 (‘the Convention’), was nonetheless entitled … Continue reading In re NY (A Child) (Reunite International and others intervening): SC 30 Oct 2019
Persons employed by a carrier in the work of keeping or making a vessel seaworthy are the carrier’s agents whose diligence or lack of it is attributable to the carrier. A shipowner’s or carrier’s duty under Article III, Rule 1 would not start and he would not be responsible for work carried out until the … Continue reading Riverstone Meat Co Pty Ltd v Lancashire Shipping Co (“The Muncaster Castle”): HL 1961
Judges: Hobhouse J Citations: [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 378 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2 Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract of carriage. The effect of … Continue reading The Holstencruiser: 1992
Judges: Lloyd J Citations: [1981] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 555 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2 Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract of carriage. The effect of … Continue reading The Filikos: 1981
The plaintiff was seeking to claim against his employers for personal injuries. There was correspondence with them before action that did not lead to a settlement. When the writ was issued a junior clerk made a mistake and issued it in the very similar name of an associated company of the employers. The defendant challenged … Continue reading Mitchell v Harris Engineering Co Ltd: CA 1967
The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to share information was outwith the powers of the Parliament. It extended the information to be … Continue reading The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate: SC 28 Jul 2016
A shipper’s liability for known dangerous goods is not limited by fault or by negligence. Citations: Independent 06-Feb-1996, Times 05-Feb-1996 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules Article IV R 6, 3 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Effort Shipping Co Ltd v Linden Management Sa and Another (The Glannis Nk) QBD 5-May-1994 A danger to the … Continue reading Effort Shipping Co Ltd v Linden Management Sa and Another (The Glannis Nk): CA 5 Feb 1996
Judges: Kerr LJ Citations: [1983] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 219 Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Applied – Pyrene Co Ltd v Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD 1954 The fob contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract of … Continue reading The Strathnewton: CA 1983
The appellant challenged a decision that he did not qualify for asylum or humanitarian protection and that his further representations were not a fresh human rights claim under paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules. He argued that the return to the UK of his wife and daughter changed the circumstances requiring a fresh application. Held: … Continue reading Zoumbas v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 27 Nov 2013
In each case the defendant sought to resist European Extradition Warrants saying that an order would be a disporportionate interference in their human right to family life. The Court asked whether its approach as set out in Norris, had to be amended in the light of the case of ZH. Held: HH and PH’s appeals … Continue reading HH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa: SC 20 Jun 2012
Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory. Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to encourage claimants back into work. It was said that thus contradicted the other policy of providing no free … Continue reading DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 15 May 2019
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return with her. Held: The mother’s appeal succeeded. The court had to consider the … Continue reading ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011
(Grand Chamber) The Swiss Court had rejected the claimant mother’s claim, under article 13b of the Hague Convention, that there was a grave risk that returning the child to Israel would lead to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place him in an intolerable situation. Held: To enforce the order would be an unjustifiable interference … Continue reading Neulinger And Shuruk v Switzerland: ECHR 6 Jul 2010
The appellant convicted of a racially-aggravated vicious murder. Since conviction he had spent almost five years in segregation from other prisoners. The appellant now alleged that some very substantial periods of segregation had been in breach of the prison rules and of his Human Rights. Time limits for authorisation had not been complied with. Held: … Continue reading Shahid v Scottish Ministers (Scotland): SC 14 Oct 2015
The Court was asked two questions, first as to its jurisdiction according to the meaning of an ‘EEA Decision’ within the 2006 Regulations, and second as to the position under the Directive of a child who is a third country national but has been placed in the legal guardianship of European Union citizens under the … Continue reading SM (Algeria) v Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section: SC 14 Feb 2018
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was established in three prison officers. In one case the officer opened the letter in front … Continue reading Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006
