Citations: (1861) 6 H and N 630 Statutes: Bills of Lading Act 1855 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Borealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others and Bergesen Dy A/S Berge Sisar Dorealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others HL 27-Mar-2001 The ship came to port, and samples of the cargo proved contaminated. … Continue reading Fox v Nott: 1861
The endorser of a bill of lading is not liable after he has endorsed over the bill of lading to another who is liable; the shipper remains liable as an original party to the contract. ‘Looking at the whole statute it seems to me that the obvious meaning is that the assignee who receives the … Continue reading Smurthwaite v Wilkins: 1862
Citations: [1990] 1 Lloyd’s 252 Statutes: Bills of Lading Act 1855 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Borealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others and Bergesen Dy A/S Berge Sisar Dorealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others HL 27-Mar-2001 The ship came to port, and samples of the cargo proved contaminated. The carrier … Continue reading The Delfini: 1990
The claimant appealed against a finding of indebtedness to the bank. He had said at trial that the bank had been charging interest at 25%. The bank denied this, but after trial it became clear that he had been correct. The bank argued for abuse of process, res judicata and estoppel, and requested a strike … Continue reading Sarwar v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc (Rev 1): ChD 27 Jul 2011
‘Negotiable’, when used in relation to a bill of lading, means simply transferable. A negotiable bill of lading is not negotiable in the strict sense; it cannot, as can be done by the negotiation of a bill of exchange, give to the transferee a better title than the transferor has got, but it can by … Continue reading Kum and Another v Wah Tat Bank Ltd: HL 1971
The shipment was made under a candf sale contract, a straight bill of lading, pursuant to a charterparty between the defendant and the claimant shipowner, Gardano. The bill named the Greek Ministry as consignee. The shipowner argued, relying on the 1855 Act that the shipper had lost its title to sue by the transfer of … Continue reading Gardano and Giampieri v Greek Petroleum George Mamidakis and Co: 1961
What does the word ‘property’ encompass in the context of the assignment of a bill of lading? Is it limited to the general property in the goods, that is, the legal title to the goods as is transferred by a sale? Or does it include the special property which signifies the right to possession? Held: … Continue reading Sewell v Burdick: HL 1884
The court considered the circumstances under which a contract might be implied: ‘As the question whether or not any such contract is to be implied is one of fact, its answer must depend upon the circumstances of each particular case – and the different sets of facts which arise for consideration in these cases are … Continue reading The Aramis: CA 1989
In the case of a Bill of lading issued for quantities out of undivided consignments and where those quantities had been sold to different buyers and the various bills of lading endorsed over to them, those endorsements were ineffective to pass the legal title in the parts of an undivided whole to a purchaser. Citations: … Continue reading In re Wait: 1927
The ship came to port, and samples of the cargo proved contaminated. The carrier asserted that the consignee was to be deemed to have demanded delivery, and had so assumed the risk. The court found that the mere taking of samples was not such a demand. An assertion of a formal right was required. A … Continue reading Borealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others and Bergesen Dy A/S Berge Sisar Dorealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others: HL 27 Mar 2001
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts