National Dock Labour Board v John Bland and Company Ltd and others: HL 25 May 1971

The parties disputed whether the timber companies with yards adjacent to the regulated ports were in those Ports so as to make their workers ‘dock workers’. Timber would be unloaded from ships and stored within the docks, before, when needed, it would be transported by dock workers to the yards of the timber merchants outside the docks for the companies involved.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. When taken from the rented area in the dock estates, it may be three months after storage there and delivered to John Bland and Co.’s yard and the yards of the other respondents whether in or outside the dock estates, it cannot properly be described still as cargo. The scheme covered the dock yards, but in this case, did not cover adjacent premises. Lord Cross of Chelsea said: ‘I cannot agree that the definition of ‘cargo’ in the 1946 Act obliges one to depart from the ordinary meaning of the word so far as concerns anything which has been carried in a ship. In ordinary parlance all things carried in a ship do not automatically cease to be cargo as soon as the ship berths and they are taken out of her. Depending on how they are dealt with they may continue to be fairly describable as ‘cargo’ for a period – in some cases possibly a considerable period – after they have left the ship. On the other hand, goods which are to be carried on a ship – prospective cargo – are not so naturally described as ‘cargo’ and that perhaps is why the legislature thought it necessary to make it clear by express words that ‘cargo’ in this Act was to include prospective cargo.’
Lord Donovan, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Pearson, Lord Diplock, and, Lord Cross of Chelsea
[1971] UKHL 4, [1971] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 2, [1971] 2 All ER 779, [1972] AC 222, [1971] 2 WLR 1491, [1972] 14 KIR 137, [1971] ITR 152
Bailii
Docks and Harbours Act 1966 1(1), Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act 1946, Dock Workers’ Employment Scheme 1967
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedIsabella Dilworth (Widow) and Others v The Commissioner for Land and Income Tax and The Commissioner of Stamps PC 26-Nov-1898
(New Zealand) Lord Watson discussed the meaning of the word ‘include’ in a list in a statute: ‘The word ‘include’ is very generally used in interpretation clauses in order to enlarge the meaning of words or phrases occurring in the body of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.279732