Category: Transport

Watts Watts and Co Ltd v Mitsui and Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1917

War – Ship – Charter-Party – Breach by Ship – Measure of Damages – Exception of Restraints of Princes
The respondents chartered a ship from the appellants to proceed to M. before a certain date and to load and carry to Japan a cargo which the respondents had bought. The charter-party excepted ‘restraints of princes.’ The appellants failed to provide a ship, pleading as excuse a reasonable apprehension that the ship might be seized by the King’s enemies. The respondents were unable to obtain another ship and had to repudiate their contract with the sellers of the cargo, paying them (after arbitration proceeding) pounds 4500. The respondents claimed as damages pounds 4500 together with such a sum as represented their loss of profit on the venture.
Held ( a) that restraint of princes must be actual not prospective, ( b) that the measure of damages was the difference between the contract price of the cargo at M. and that which it would have fetched in Japan had the voyage been prosecuted, subject to deduction of the amount of the insurance premium the respondents would have required to pay.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Lord Finlay), Earl Loreburn, Lords Dunedin, Parker, and Sumner

Citations:

[1917] UKHL 650, 54 SLR 650

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Contract

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.631003

Davidson’s Trustees v Caledonian Railway Co: HL 4 Aug 1902

A railway company acquired the right of a feuar in certain lands. The feuar’s title reserved to the superiors the whole metals and minerals, with certain exceptions. The railway company did not acquire the right of the superiors in the lands. Certain minerals having been excavated by the railway company in the course of making the railway, partly above and partly below the formation level, the superiors brought an action against the railway company, in which it was found on 19th July 1894 that the superiors were the sole proprietors of the minerals, ‘subject to the rights conferred upon’ the feuar ‘and conveyed’ to the railway company, and a proof was allowed in regard to the minerals so far as lying below formation level, ‘reserving to the pursuers any claim’ for minerals above formation level, ‘to be determined by arbitration in terms of the statute.’ No steps were taken by either party to have the value of the minerals taken so far as above formation level determined as an omitted interest under section 117 of the Lands Clauses (Scotland) Act 1845. Thereafter, the railway company on 7th December 1896 having denied liability for these latter minerals, the superiors brought an action in which they claimed damages for the excavation of the minerals above formation level from the railway company as trespassers, and maintained that the question as to the right of the railway company to take these minerals was res judicata in the previous action, and that, as they had failed to give notice to treat, the period for compulsory purchase as an omitted interest had expired. The railway company maintained that the removal of the minerals in question was within their rights, but this contention was negatived by the Court. Held that the question as to the rights of parties with regard to the minerals above formation level had not been determined in the previous action, and that, as consequently six months had not elapsed since that question was finally determined by law, it was still open to the railway company to have the amount of compensation determined by arbitration under section 117 of the Lands Clauses (Scotland) Act 1845.
Opinions that if the question was finally determined in the previous action, it was the duty of the superiors as claimants and not the duty of the railway company to initiate proceedings for determining compensation under section 117.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), and Lords Ashbourne, Robertson, and Lindley

Citations:

[1902] UKHL 98, 40 SLR 98

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.630804

Gottfried Heinrich: ECJ 10 Mar 2009

(Grand Chamber) The claimant had been refused entry onto an airplane on the basis that he had in his cabin baggage a prohibited article, namely a tennis racquet. He said that the regulation was not binding because the annex on which the racquet was listed was not published.
Held: A regulation could not take effect without being published, and nor could it be enforced without being published.

Citations:

[2009] EUECJ C-345/06, C-345/06

Links:

Bailii, Times

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Heinrich (Law Governing The Institutions) ECJ 10-Apr-2008
ECJ Annex to a regulation not published in the Official Journal – Access to documents – Articles 2(3) and 3(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 – Article 254 EC. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.332834

Berens v Rucker: 1746

Insurers were liable to pay the charge of a compromise bona fide made to prevent the ship from being condemned as lawful prize, or to avoid a greater expence.

Citations:

[1746] EngR 48, (1746-1779) 1 Black W 313, (1746) 96 ER 175 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Insurance

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.380436

Rowtor Steamship Co Ltd v Love and Stewart Ltd: HL 25 Jul 1916

The lay-day and demurrage clause of the charter-party of a ship chartered for the carriage of pit props ran as follows,
the words in italics being written interlineations on a printed form-‘The cargo is to be loaded at the rate of 125 fathoms daily, and discharged at the rate of 125 fathoms daily, reversible, with customary steamship dispatch as fast as the steamer can receive and deliver, during the ordinary working hours of the respective ports, Sundays, general or local holidays (unless used) in both loading and discharging excepted. . . ‘
Held, in an action for demurrage, (1) that the charter-party was for a fixed number of days for loading and discharging, known as soon as the amount of cargo was known, and that the printed words so far as inconsistent therewith must be read as referring only to the manner of loading and discharging, and (2) that time lost owing to wet weather and Saturday half-holidays, when according to the custom of the port of discharge work was suspended, could not be read into the exception.
/>
The charterers of a vessel were entitled to thirteen days for loading and thirteen days for discharging ‘reversible,’ i.e., to twenty-six days for both operations. The shipper of the cargo, who was to deliver f.o.b., also acted as the charterers’ agent to load a full cargo and to make disbursements on account of freight for ship’s disbursements, and also as the ship’s agent to report and clear her at the custom-house and to do her business generally, including the engagement of her stevedores. By arrangement with the captain the shipper by working overtime loaded the cargo in nine instead of thirteen days, and took credit in the ship’s disbursements for the amount so earned, viz., pounds 31,10s. On the bill of lading was noted the amount of the ship’s disbursements, and on the margin-‘Thirteen days used for loading.’ The shipper included the amount of the ship’s disbursements in his invoice and in his bill, which was duly met by the charterers on taking up the bill of lading. In the knowledge that there had been an arrangement for dispatch, though not of its extent, and of the total of the ship’s disbursements, though not of how they were made up, the charterers took delivery of the cargo under the bill of lading.
In an action for demurrage, held that the charterers were entitled to seventeen days for unloading.

Judges:

Lord Parker, Lord Sumner, and Lord Wrenbury

Citations:

[1916] UKHL 706, 53 SLR 706

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.630688

Pan Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Creditcorp Ltd: CA 24 Mar 1993

(The Trident Beauty) Advance payments made under a charterparty contract were not recoverable the assignees when the charter became ineffective. Such contracts were provisional as between the original parties, but did not retain that characteristic on assignment unless the contract was, in effect, clearly identified as such.

Citations:

Gazette 24-Mar-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Pan Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Creditcorp Ltd CA 1-Feb-1994
(The Trident Beauty) Assignee not obliged to repay advance payment for non-performance. . .
See Also – Pan Ocean Shipping Ltd v Creditcorp Ltd HL 1-Feb-1994
(The Trident Beauty) Charter hire, payable by the charterers 15 days in advance, had been assigned to a third party. The appeal related to hire duly paid in advance for a 15 day period, throughout the whole of which the vessel proved in fact to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Transport

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.84550

Pan Ocean Shipping Ltd v Creditcorp Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1994

(The Trident Beauty) Charter hire, payable by the charterers 15 days in advance, had been assigned to a third party. The appeal related to hire duly paid in advance for a 15 day period, throughout the whole of which the vessel proved in fact to be off hire, and after the end of which she continued off hire until the charter was justifiably terminated by the charterers on account of the owners’ repudiation. The owners were in these circumstances under an express obligation (and, even in the absence of an express obligation would have been under an implied obligation) to repay the charter hire overpaid, but were not worth powder and shot. The charterers claimed, unsuccessfully, to recover the overpaid hire from the third party assignee to whom it had been paid.
Held: An assignee of hire contract need not repay advance repayments
Lord Goff of Chieveley stated as a general rule that the existence of a contractual regime for the recovery of overpayments made the imposition by law of a remedy for total failure of consideration ‘both unnecessary and inappropriate’. ‘I am of course well aware that writers on the law of restitution have been exploring the possibility that, in exceptional circumstances, a plaintiff may have a claim in restitution when he has conferred a benefit on the defendant in the course of performing an obligation to a third party (see, eg, Goff and Jones on the Law of Restitution, 4th ed (1993), pp 55 et seq, and (for a particular example) Burrows on the Law of Restitution, (1993) pp 271-272). But, quite apart from the fact that the existence of a remedy in restitution in such circumstances must still be regarded as a matter of debate, it is always recognised that serious difficulties arise if the law seeks to expand the law of restitution to redistribute risks for which provision has been made under an applicable contract.’
Lord Woolf said: ‘There is no justification for subjecting an assignee, because he has received a payment in advance, to an obligation to make a repayment because of the non-performance of an event for which he has no responsibility.’

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Woolf

Citations:

Independent 01-Feb-1994, [1994] 1 Lloyds Rep 365, [1994] 1 WLR 161, [1994] 1 All ER 470

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Pan Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Creditcorp Ltd CA 24-Mar-1993
(The Trident Beauty) Advance payments made under a charterparty contract were not recoverable the assignees when the charter became ineffective. Such contracts were provisional as between the original parties, but did not retain that characteristic . .
Appeal from – Pan Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Creditcorp Ltd CA 1-Feb-1994
(The Trident Beauty) Assignee not obliged to repay advance payment for non-performance. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Transport

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.84552

Currie v M’Knight: HL 16 Nov 1896

The maritime law administered by Courts of Admiralty in England and Scotland is the same, and the doctrine of maritime lien for damages is part of that law.
In order that a maritime lien should attach to a ship for damages done to another, some act of navigation of the ship itself must either mediately or immediately be the cause of the damage. It is not sufficient that there is a wrongful act, on the part of the crew, unless the ship is itself the instrument by which the damage is caused.
The ss. ‘Dunlossit’ and the ss. ‘Easdale’ were moored alongside of an open quay in the Sound of Islay. The ‘Easdale’ lay outside of the ‘Dunlossit,’ and was moored to the quay by cables passing over the deck of the ‘Dunlossit.’ There was a gale of exceptional violence during the night, and the master of the ‘Dunlossit,’ in order to prevent danger to his vessel by contact with the ‘Easdale,’ cut the moorings of the ‘Easdale’ and put to sea, with the result that the ‘Easdale’ drifted on the rocks and was injured.
The owners of the ‘Easdale’ afterwards obtained decree for the amount of the damage against the owners of the ‘Dunlossit,’ on the ground that the act of the master of the ‘Dunlossit,’ in cutting the ‘Easdale’s’ moorings, was a wrongful act.
The ‘Dunlossit’ was sold judicially, and in a competition as to the proceeds between a mortgagee of the ‘Dunlossit’ and the owners of the ‘Easdale,’ who claimed a preference in respect of a maritime lien for the damages due to them, held that no maritime lien attached, the damage not having been caused in the course of navigation of the ship, but by an act of the crew before she had moved from the quay.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), Lords Watson, Herschell, Morris, and Shand

Citations:

[1896] UKHL 93 – 1, 34 SLR 93 – 1, [1896] UKLawRpAC 55, (1897) AC 97

Links:

Bailii, Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Applied – The Eschersheim; The Jade HL 1976
The 1956 Act implemented as part of the domestic law the treaty obligations of the United Kingdom under the International Convention Relating to the Arrest of Seagoing Ships signed at Brussels on 10 May 1952 (the Arrest Convention).
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.634024

Dampskibsselskabet Svendborg v Love and Stewart Ltd: HL 27 Jun 1916

Freight was to be paid for a cargo of pit-props per intaken piled fathom. The charterers having previously measured the props sent to be taken on board refused to join in a measurement at lading. The ship took a tally. In a question as to the amount of freight due, the ship’s mate, who had been one of the two men engaged on the tally, was the only witness adduced to prove it. He admitted that during the taking of the tally he had had occasionally to be away for a short time to see after the proper stowing of the cargo. Held that the tally had not been established, his evidence being defective, and in the circumstances no inference from the capacity of the ship or the weight of cargo to rectify the defect being possible.

Judges:

Lord Parker, Lord Sumner, and Lord Wrenbury

Citations:

[1916] UKHL 574, 53 SLR 574

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Transport

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.630684

Bugbugs Ltd v Transport for London: QBD 21 Dec 2007

The defendant appealed a refusal of the court to strike out as an abuse of process the respondent’s claim that their ‘pedicabs’, a kind of rickshaw, required licensing as Hackney Carriages.
Held: Strike out refused.

Judges:

Swift J DBE

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2987 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.263257

Commission v Netherlands: ECJ 24 Apr 2007

ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Conclusion by a Member State of a bilateral air transport agreement with the United States of America – Right of establishment Secondary law governing the internal market in air transport – External competence of the Community.

Citations:

[2007] EUECJ C-523/04

Links:

Bailii

European, Transport

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.251873

The Eschersheim; The Jade: HL 1976

The 1956 Act implemented as part of the domestic law the treaty obligations of the United Kingdom under the International Convention Relating to the Arrest of Seagoing Ships signed at Brussels on 10 May 1952 (the Arrest Convention).
Held: The fundamental rule for the arrest of a ship under the provisions of the Arrest Convention is that the right to arrest exists only if the claim arose in respect of a ‘particular ship’ and the owner was liable in respect of a maritime claim relating to that ship.
Lord Diplock explained the purpose and effect of the Arrest Convention, saying: ‘The purpose of that Convention was to provide uniform rules as to the right to arrest seagoing ships by judicial process to secure a maritime claim against the owner of the ship. Article 1 defined by reference to their subject matter various classes of maritime claim in respect of which alone a right of arrest was to be exercisable; while articles 2 and 3 granted and confined the right of arrest to either (a) the particular ship in respect of which a maritime claim falling within one or more of those classes arose or (b) any other ship owned by the person who was, at the time when the maritime claim arose, the owner of the particular ship.
The provisions of article 3 represented a compromise between the wide powers of arrest available in some of the civil law countries (including for this purpose Scotland) in which jurisdiction to entertain claims against a defendant could be based on the presence within the territorial jurisdiction of any property belonging to him, and the limited powers of arrest available in England and other common law jurisdictions, where the power to arrest was exercisable only in respect of claims falling within the Admiralty jurisdiction of the court and based upon a supposed maritime lien over the particular ship in respect of which the claim arose.’
Where a statute was passed in order to give effect to an international convention, if the statute and the convention differ in their language, the statute should be construed in the same sense as the convention ‘if the words of the statute are reasonably capable of bearing that meaning’.

Judges:

Diplock, Simon of Glaisdale, Kilbrandon, Salmon and Edmund-Davies LL

Citations:

[1976] 1 WLR 430, [1976] 2 Lloyds Rep 1

Statutes:

Admralty Act 1956, International Convention Relating to the Arrest of Seagoing Ships signed at Brussels on 10 May 1952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Currie v M’Knight HL 16-Nov-1896
The maritime law administered by Courts of Admiralty in England and Scotland is the same, and the doctrine of maritime lien for damages is part of that law.
In order that a maritime lien should attach to a ship for damages done to another, . .

Cited by:

Approved – Samick Lines Co Ltd v Owners of The Antonis P Lemos HL 2-Jan-1985
The House was asked as to the effect of the section.
Held: Since the provisions of the statute under consideration were designed to give domestic effect to an international convention, a broad and liberal construction should be given to them . .
Cited – Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation and others v Privalov and others CA 24-Jan-2007
The court was asked whether when contracts have been induced by bribery and have been rescinded on discovery of the bribery, that constitutes a dispute which can be determined by arbitration in the context of a common form of arbitration clause.
Cited – The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others ChD 26-Nov-2010
The claimant newspapers complained of the spidering of the web-sites and redistribution of the materials collected by the defendants to its subscribers. The defendants including the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) denied that they . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Transport

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.248212

Catch22Bus Ltd and Another v The Secretary of State for Transport: CA 18 Jun 2019

The court was asked as to the relevance of certain information that was taken into account by a deputy traffic commissioner in determining whether Philip Higgs and Catch22bus Limited (the company), the appellants, were of ‘good repute’ in accordance with the Public Passengers Vehicle Act 1981

Judges:

Lady Justice Sharp

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1022

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.638815

The Lu Shan: AdCt 15 Jun 1993

Interest given up to striking balance on compromise of collision claim.
Interest to be calculated up to the point a the claimed being compromised.

Citations:

Ind Summary 19-Jul-1993, Times 15-Jun-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Transport

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.89832

Aklagaren v Percy, Mickelsson v Joakim Roos: ECJ 14 Dec 2006

ECJ Opinion – Approximation of laws – Recreational craft – Rules on the use of personal watercraft – Directive 94/25/EC – Article 28 EC – Measure having equivalent effect.

Judges:

Knott AG

Citations:

C-142/05, [2006] EUECJ C-142/05

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 94/25/EC 28

Cited by:

See Also – Aklagaren v Percy, Mickelsson v Joakim Roos ECJ 4-Jun-2009
ECJ Directive 94/25/EC – Approximation of laws – Recreational craft – Prohibition of using personal watercraft on waters other than general navigable waterways – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC Measures having . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Transport

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.248076

Save Our Railways and Others, (Regina on the application of ) v The Director of Passenger Rail Franchising: Admn 15 Dec 1995

The court was asked: ‘In specifying minimum service levels for railway passenger services for the initial letting of franchises has the Director of Passenger Rail Franchising complied with a direction given to him by the Secretary of State for Transport?’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham, Waite, Otton LJJ

Citations:

[1995] EWHC Admin 6, [1996] CLC 589

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245696

The Mahkutai: PC 24 Apr 1996

(Hong Kong) The question was whether shipowners, who were not parties to the bill of lading contract between the charterers and carriers on the one part, and the cargo-owners, the bill of lading being a charterer’s bill, could enforce against the cargo-owners an exclusive jurisdiction clause contained in that contract.
Held: Ship owners may not rely on an exclusive jurisdiction clause in a charterer’s contract. They could not because the Himalaya clause in the bill of lading, which extended the benefit of all ‘exceptions, limitations, provision, conditions and liberties herein benefiting the carrier’ to ‘servants, agents and subcontractors of the carrier’ did not include the exclusive jurisdiction clause because an exclusive jurisdiction clause is a mutual agreement and does not benefit only one party. Rather the rights conferred entail correlative obligations. A contract (and in particular a Himalaya clause) must be construed to give commercial effect if possible.

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley

Citations:

Times 24-Apr-1996, [1996] AC 650, [1996] 3 WLR 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – New Zealand Shipping Co Ltd v A M Satterthwaite and Co Ltd (The Eurymedon) PC 25-Feb-1974
The Board considered the extent to which an exclusion clause in a bill of lading could be relied on by the third party stevedore, an independent contractor employed by the carrier, who was sued by the consignees of goods for negligently damaging the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’) HL 13-Mar-2003
Cargo owners sought damages for their cargo which had been damaged aboard the ship. The contract had been endorsed with additional terms. That variation may have changed the contract from a charterer’s to a shipowner’s bill.
Held: The specific . .
Cited – Borkan General Trading Ltd v Monsoon Trading Ltd CA 8-Jul-2003
A contract for a tug expressly provided a benefit for a third party. He now sought to claim benefit under it.
Held: If, in the absence of a trust in his favour a third party for whose benefit a contract had expressly been made, could not take . .
Cited – Nisshin Shipping Co Ltd v Cleaves and Company Ltd and others ComC 7-Nov-2003
One party sought a declaration that arbitrators should have no jurisdiction to determine claims for commission said to be due to the Respondent chartering brokers.
Held: Because he has in effect become a statutory assignee of the promisee’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Jurisdiction, Contract, Arbitration

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.89834

Classic Maritime Inc v Limbungan Makmur SDN BHD and Another: CA 27 Jun 2019

Appeal from decision that the charterer under a contract of affreightment was not entitled to rely upon an exceptions clause referring to ‘accidents at the mine’ because it would not have been ready and willing to provide cargoes for shipment even if the accident had not occurred, and was therefore in breach of an absolute duty to provide such cargoes; but that nevertheless the shipowner was not entitled to recover substantial damages because this would put it in a better financial position than it would have been in if the charterer had been ready and willing to provide cargoes.

Judges:

Lord Justice Males

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1102

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.638817

Transfield Shipping Inc of Panama v Mercator Shipping Inc of Monrovia: ComC 1 Dec 2006

The owners made substantial losses after the charterers breached the contract by failing to redliver the ship on time as agreed.
Held: On the facts found the Owners’ primary claim is not too remote. To the knowledge of the Charterers, it was accepted as a hazard of late redelivery that the vessel would miss her cancellation date for the next fixture. This was the kind of result which the parties would have had in mind. Rapid variations in market rates in either direction were market knowledge and the kind of loss, the need, on account of delay in redelivery, to adjust the dates for the subsequent employment of the vessel with a reduction in the previously agreed rate of hire, was within the contemplation of the parties as a not unlikely result of the breach.

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3030 (Comm), [2007] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 19, [2007] 1 All ER (Comm) 379, [2006] 2 CLC 1069

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Hadley v Baxendale Exc 23-Feb-1854
Contract Damages; What follows the Breach Naturaly
The plaintiffs had sent a part of their milling machinery for repair. The defendants contracted to carry it, but delayed in breach of contract. The plaintiffs claimed damages for the earnings lost through the delay. The defendants appealed, saying . .
Cited – Meyer v Sanderson 1913
The charterer had sent out the vessel on a further voyage even on the day when the charter was to come to an end. The owner sought damages.
Held: The charterers were ordered to ‘pay for the use of the steamer on that last voyage at the rate . .
Cited – The Peonia CA 1991
The ship had been returned beyond the charter date. The court was asked whether, when the vessel was sent on a legitimate last voyage but, through no fault of the charterers, was then redelivered after the final terminal date, the owners were . .
Cited – Watson Steamship Co v Merryweather and Co 1913
The vessel owners sought damages when the ship was redelivered 20 days late by the charterers. The special case as pleaded was ‘A claim was made by the owners for damages for dislocation of business and other special damage, but there was no . .
Cited – Christopher Hill Ltd v Ashington Piggeries Ltd CA 1969
The buyer suppied a food formula to a food mixer and claimed damages when the food mix injured his mink. The defendant argued that the level of damages sought exceeded that expectations of the parties when the contract was entered into.
Held: . .
Cited – London and Overseas Freighters v Timber Shipping Co SA ‘The London Explorer’ HL 1972
The London Explorer was under a charter where the hire was ‘to continue until the hour of the day of her redelivery’. The charterers redelivered the ship about 3 months late because, although she had set out on a legitimate last voyage, she had been . .
Cited – Christopher Hill Ltd v Ashington Piggeries Ltd HL 1972
Mink farmers had asked a compounder of animal foods to make up mink food to a supplied formula.
Held: There was reliance as to the suitability of the ingredients only.
Lord Diplock said: ‘Unless the Sale of Goods Act 1893 is to be allowed . .
Cited – The Black Falcon 1991
The ship under charter was returned late. The arbitrators had awarded the market rate of hire from the date when the vessel would have been delivered if she had not undertaken her last (illegitimate) voyage rather than from the last date when she . .
Cited – The Dione 1975
Charterers should have redelivered the vessel by a certain date but failed to do so.
Held: They were held liable in damages for the difference between the market and charterparty rate for the overrun period. Lord Denning said that where the . .
Cited – The Johnny 1977
Where a charterer had overrun his time, and faced a claim for damages, under the provisions of the amended Baltime form, the market rate should be assessed by reference to the market rate for 11-13 month charters (the period of the charterparty) as . .
Cited – Torvald Klaveness A/S v Arni Maritime Corporation (The Gregos) ChD 1991
The ship was returned late from a charter. The court was asked whether or not the legitimacy of the last voyage fell to be established at the date when the order was given or at the time when the last voyage began.
Held: It was the second: . .
Cited – Torvald Klaveness A/S v Arni Maritime Corporation (The Gregos) CA 4-Jun-1993
The ship was returned by the charterer after the expiry of the time charter. The court was asked as to when the validity of the last order was to be tested.
Held: The legitimacy of the charterer’s final order was to be tested at the date it . .
Cited – Torvald Klaveness A/S v Arni Maritime Corporation (The Gregos) HL 28-Oct-1994
In a continuing charter when it was clear that the time of the charter will be exceeded, the contract allows an action for an anticipatory breach. Any new redelivery order was to be obtained after after it first became impossible to meet the charter . .
Cited – Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries CA 1949
The plaintiffs claimed for loss of the profits from their laundry business because of late delivery of a boiler.
Held: The Court did not regard ‘loss of profits from the laundry business’ as a single type of loss. They distinguished losses . .
Cited – Czarnikow (C ) Ltd v Koufos; The Heron II HL 17-Oct-1967
The vessel had arrived late at Basrah in breach of the terms of the charterparty. The House was asked as to the measure of damages. The charterers had intended to sell the cargo of sugar promptly upon arrival, and now claimed for the fall in the . .
Cited – H Parsons (Livestock) Limited v Uttley Ingham and C. Limited CA 1978
The defendants had installed a pig nut hopper for the plaintiffs, but failed to provide adequate ventilation, causing the nuts to go sour, and the pigs to be poisoned.
Held: Remoteness of damage is a question of law. The death of the pigs . .
Cited – Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society CA 1996
The Society, acting as a bank, had at first failed to pay its customer’s cheque for andpound;4,550, even though there were sufficient funds. The bank said that it had been reported lost. The customer sought damages to his business reputation.
Cited – Brown v KMR Services Ltd CA 26-Jul-1995
Allied Maples had made a corporate takeover of assets and businesses within the Gillow group of companies, during which it was negligently advised by the defendant solicitors in relation to seeking protection against contingent liabilities of . .
Cited – The Rio Claro 1987
For a loss arising from a breach of contract to be recoverable, Staughton J said: ‘It must be such as the contract breaker should reasonably have contemplated as not unlikely to result. To that direction must be added the point that the precise . .
Cited – The ‘Pegase’ 1981
The court considered the measure of damages for breach of contract in the light of the cases in the Heron II and Victoria Laundry: ‘the principle in Hadley v Baxendale is now no longer stated in terms of two rules, but rather in terms of a single . .
Cited – British Columbia, etc. Saw Mills Co. Ltd v Nettleship 1868
Willes J said: ‘the mere fact of knowledge cannot increase the liability. The knowledge must be brought home to the party sought to be charged under such circumstances that he must know that the person he contracts with reasonably believes that he . .
Cited – Atlantic Shipping and Trading Co v Louis Dreyfus and Co HL 1921
Lord Dunedin said: ‘My Lords in these commercial cases it is I think of the highest importance that authorities should not be disturbed and if your lordships find that a certain doctrine has been laid down in former cases and presumably acted upon . .
Cited – The ‘Nukila’ CA 1987
Hobhouse LJ said: ‘Turning to the authorities it must at the outset be recognised that, whether or not they are strictly binding on us, they must, insofar as they represent the existing authoritative statements of the law only be departed from if . .
Cited – R and H Hall Ltd v WH Pim Junr and Co Ltd HL 1928
Pim sold a cargo of wheat to Hall at 51s 9d a quarter. Hall had agreed to sell a similar cargo to Williams at 56s 9d a quarter, and Williams to sell again Suzuki at 59s 3d a quarter. Pim bought a cargo of wheat on board the ‘S.S. Indianic’ at 60s a . .
Cited – Slater v Hoyle and Smith Ltd 1920
Cotton cloth was sold. The buyer was to use it to fulfil his own contract with a sub-buyer. The cloth was not of the contractual quality but the buyer was able to perform the sub-contract by delivering the same cloth. The sub-buyers paid the full . .
Cited – Bence Graphics International Ltd v Fasson UK Ltd CA 24-Oct-1996
Bench sold vinyl film to Fasson for decals to identify sea-borne bulk containers. A term required the film to be legible condition for at least five years. Fasson sold them to container manufacturers who supplied the containers marked with the . .
Cited – Koch Marine Inc v D’Amica Societa Di Navigazione ARL (The Elena d’Amico) QBD 1980
The ship owners wrongfully repudiated a charterparty in March 1973, 14 months after its inception. The charterers did not hire a substitute but claimed damages for the loss of profits they would have made between January and April 1974, during which . .
Cited – Louis Dreyfus Trading Ltd v Reliance Trading Ltd 2004
LD sold 7kmt sugar to R, C and FFO Banjul at $257.43 per mt. Shipment was ‘per m.v. Dawn currently discharging at Banjul’. An associate of R had already sold 5kmt to B at $290 per mt, for which the sugar was bought. LD knew of the resale and . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Transfield Shipping Inc of Panama v Mercator Shipping Inc of Monrovia (the ‘Achilleas’) CA 6-Sep-2007
The court considered damages for late redelivery of a time-chartered vessel. . .
At first instance – Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas) HL 9-Jul-2008
The parties contracted to charter the Achileas. The charterer gave notice to terminate the hire, and the owner found a new charterer. Until the termination the charterers sub-chartered. That charter was not completed, delaying the ship for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Contract, Damages

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246737

Association of British Travel Agents Ltd v Civil Aviation Authority: CA 18 Oct 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1356

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Aviation (Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing) Regulations 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Association of British Travel Agents Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Civil Aviation Authority and Another Admn 16-Jan-2006
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Transport

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245376

Couturier and others v Hastie and Another: HL 26 Jun 1856

Action for recovery of value of cargo lost at sea.

Citations:

[1856] UKHL J3, 10 ER 1065, [1856] EngR 713, (1856) 5 HLC 673, (1856) 10 ER 1065

Links:

Bailii, Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Couturier And Others v Hastie And Others 26-Jun-1852
Action for recovery of cargo lost at sea. . .
See Also – Hastie And Others v Couturier And Others 25-Jun-1853
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Transport

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244567

Brownsville Holdings Ltd v Adamjee Insurance Co Ltd (“The Milasan”): 2000

A 90 foot motor yacht sank in calm weather in the course of a voyage from Piraeus to Sardinia with a crew of three: a skipper, an engineer and a deckhand.
Held: The owner’s insurance claim failed. There had been a breach of warranty in these terms: ‘Warranted professional skippers and crew in charge at all times.’ The claimants accepted that this was a promissory warranty – there was no argument that it was a term simply delimiting or describing the risk. Aikens J: ‘I accept . . that a practical construction must be given to the words of the warranty. I think it is clear that the insurers were concerned to ensure that the vessel was properly looked after all the time, both winter and summer, and wherever she was – whether cruising or in a marina for the winter months.
The ‘skipper’ together with the ‘crew’ has to be ‘in charge’ of the vessel ‘at all times’. In my view the wording ‘professional skippers and crew to be in charge’ means that the skipper and the crew’ together are to take care of and manage the vessel; that is the sense in which they are to be ‘in charge’ of her. They are also to be ‘in charge’ of the vessel together ‘all the time’. The last phrase is . . quite clear. It means that there must be a professional skipper and a crew that looks after the vessel the whole time, as opposed to intermittently or at intervals.’ As the claimants had not employed anyone who was a ‘professional skipper’ over a period of time, they were in breach of warranty. In summary ‘On the proper construction of the ‘professional skipper warranty’ the claimants were obliged to keep a suitably qualified skipper on board the yacht at all times . . ..’

Judges:

Aikens J

Citations:

[2000] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 458, [2000] EWHC 223 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – GE Frankona Reinsurance Ltd v CMM Trust No.1400 (the ‘Newfoundland Explorer’) AdCt 22-Mar-2006
The owner sought to claim under his insurance policy. The yacht was, in the policy warranted to be fully crewed at all times. The owner had left the boat to return a few hours later when it was found on fire.
Held: The insurance claim failed. . .
Cited – Pratt v Aigaion Insurance Company SA (‘the Resolute’) CA 27-Nov-2008
The court considered the interpretation of a term in a contract of insurance to the effect that ‘Warranted Owner and/or Owner’s experienced skipper on board and in charge at all times and one experienced crew member.’, asking whether ‘at all times’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Insurance

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242640

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co Ltd v Furness Withy (Australia) Pty (“Doric Pride”): CA 25 Jan 2006

The court considered the relationship between express an implied warranties.
Held: Under a time charterparty, hire continues to run unless the charterer can bring himself within the plain words of an off-hire provision; the risk of delay is thus essentially on the time charterer (rather than the owners).
Rix LJ, with whom Brooke LJ and Sir Paul Kennedy agreed, said at: ‘ Mr Cooper went on to cite examples of the effectiveness of an express safe port warranty, even in cases of charters to nominated ports such as The Helen Miller [1980] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 95 at 101 and The Mary Lou [1981] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 272. Those citations are, in my judgment, again apposite. It is of course standard law that express warranties and provisions must be given their true effect, such as they are, and that there is only room for the implication of an indemnity clause to the extent that the express provisions do not allocate risks in other inconsistent ways.’ ‘under a time charter the risk of delay is fundamentally on a time charterer, who remains liable to pay hire in all circumstances unless the charterer can bring himself within the plain words of an off-hire provision’.

Judges:

Brooke, Rix LJJ, Sir Paul Kennedy

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 599, [2007] 2 CLC 1042, [2006] 2 All ER (Comm) 188, [2006] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 175

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At ComC – Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd. v Furness Withy (Australia) Pty (‘Doric Pride’) ComC 20-May-2005
Dispute about the meaning and effect of an ‘off hire’ clause in a single trip time charter. . .

Cited by:

Cited – NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) Nv v Cargill International Sa ComC 1-Feb-2013
The ship (Global Santosh), having been found with illicit drugs, was arrested in error, leading to considerable delays in unloading the cement cargo. The charterparty period off-hire clause (NYPE form) was applied and hire withheld by the head . .
Cited – NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) NV v Cargill International SA CA 8-Apr-2014
The court was asked as to ‘the true construction and application of a proviso to an off hire clause in a time charterparty, dealing with the capture, seizure, detention or arrest of the vessel. The issue thus raises the familiar question as to the . .
Cited – NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) Nv v Cargill International Sa SC 11-May-2016
The ship ‘Global Santosh’ had been arrested as a side issue in a dispute as to its cargo between its anticipated receiver and a sub-sub charterer.
Held: (Lord Clarke dissenting) The appeal succeeded. Any responsibility of Cargill under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242539

Dickenson v Lano: 1860

Where a third party was responsible for directing shipment by a particular carrier, it may be necessary to decide whether the shipper made a contract of carriage on behalf of the third party or whether the shipper made the contract of carriage on his own behalf at the request of the third party.

Judges:

Blackburn J

Citations:

(1860) 2 F and F 191

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Evergreen Marine Corp v Aldgate Warehouse (Wholesale) Ltd ComC 28-Mar-2003
The claimant sought payment for freight charges and demurrage. Long standing arrangements meant that the defendant was not named as shipper.
Held: The f.o.b. contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.180306

Agip Petroli SpA v Capitaneria di porto di Siracusa, Capitaneria di porto di Siracusa – Sezione staccata di Santa Panagia, Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasport: ECJ 6 Apr 2006

ECJ Maritime cabotage – Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 – Law applicable to the manning of vessels over 650 gt carrying out island cabotage – Meaning of ‘voyage which follows or precedes’ – a voyage to or from another State.

Citations:

C-456/04, [2006] EUECJ C-456/04

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92

Jurisdiction:

European

Transport

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240141

Micro Anvika Ltd and others v TNT Express Worldwide (Euro Hub) Nv and others: ComC 20 Feb 2006

Judges:

Morison J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 230 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Thomas Cook Group Ltd and Ors v Air Malta Ltd ComC 6-May-1997
The court considered the circumstances in which the court would apply the misconduct exceptions under the Convention: ‘The starting point when considering whether in any given circumstances the acts or omissions of a person entrusted with goods of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238652

Cho Yang Shipping Co Ltd v Coral (UK) Ltd: CA 15 May 1997

As between the original parties the bill of lading does not itself contain the contract of carriage but is merely evidence of it.

Judges:

Hobhouse J

Citations:

[1997] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 641, [1997] EWCA Civ 1701

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Evergreen Marine Corp v Aldgate Warehouse (Wholesale) Ltd ComC 28-Mar-2003
The claimant sought payment for freight charges and demurrage. Long standing arrangements meant that the defendant was not named as shipper.
Held: The f.o.b. contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.142097

Heathrow Hub Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Transport: Admn 1 May 2019

One of several judicial reviews of the decision of the Secretary of State for Transport (‘the Secretary of State’), made under section 5 of the Planning Act 2008 (‘the PA 2008’), to designate ‘Airports National Policy Statement: new runway capacity and infrastructure at airports in the South East of England’

Judges:

Lord Justice Hickinbottom, Mr Justice Holgate and Mr Justice Marcus Smith

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1069 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Planning, Transport

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.637783

Regina, ex parte International Air Transport Association, European Low Fares Airline Association v Department for Transport: ECJ 10 Jan 2006

ECJ Carriage by air – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Articles 5, 6 and 7 -Compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights – Validity – Interpretation of Article 234 EC

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

C-344/04, [2006] EUECJ C-344/04, Times 16-Jan-2006, [2006] ECR 1-0000, [2006] 2 CMLR 20

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 261/2004

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Mote v Regina CACD 21-Dec-2007
The defendant appealed his convictions for offences relating to the claiming of benefits, saying that he was immune from prosecution as a member of the European Parliament, and that the verdicts were inconsistent with acquittals on other charges. . .
Cited – Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd CA 19-Jun-2014
The claimant’s flight had been delayed for six hours. The airline said that the claim having been made outside the two year period applicable under the Montreal convention, no compensation was payable.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. ‘We . .
Cited – Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd and Another CA 7-Feb-2012
The claimants were disabled and, despite promises, had not had their seating needs met when flying with the defendants. . .
Cited – Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd SC 5-Mar-2014
The Court was asked whether a person may recover damages for discomfort and injury to feelings caused by a breach of the 2007 Regulations, which implement EC Regulation No. 1107/2006. The disabled passenger claimant alleged failure by the defendant . .
Cited – Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Consumer

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237645

Eleni Shipping Ltd v Transgrain Shipping Bv: ComC 10 Apr 2019

Appeal under s. 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 by the Claimant Owners against an award by which the majority of the tribunal rejected the bulk of the Owners’ claims against the Defendant Charterers arising out of the capture by pirates in the Arabian Sea of their Panamax bulk carrier ‘ELENI P’

Judges:

Justice Popplewell

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 910 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.637507

Anton Durbeck Gmbh v Den Norske Bank Asa: ComC 11 Nov 2005

The defendant bank arrested a ship carrying the claimant’s load of bananas. The cargo deteriorated while under arrest and was lost. It was not insured. The consignee sought damages from the arresting bank on the ground that it wrongfully interfered with the performance of the bill of lading contracts.
Held: The applicable law was that of Panama. ‘I do not accept that Article 217 should be given a broader interpretation so as to impose liability in the case of an arrest which affects third parties if there is negligence.’ The claim failed.

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2497 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 11(1)

Citing:

Cited – The Myrto ChD 1977
A ship had been charged. A third party sought to arrest the ship for a debt.
Held: ‘Where the owner makes a contract with a third party for the employment of the ship, of such a kind and made or performable in such circumstances, that the . .
Cited – Downsview Nominees Ltd and Another v First City Corporation Ltd and Another PC 19-Nov-1992
(New Zealand) The holder of a second debenture appointed receivers to the assets. The first debenture holder then also appointed receivers not to obtain repayment of its debt, but to disrupt the work of the first appointed receivers and in order to . .
Cited – Iraqi Ministry of Defence v Arcepey Shipping ‘The Angel Bell’ 1979
Creditors of the defendant who was subject to a Mareva injunction applied to the court to authorise the repayment of a loan out of monies otherwise subject to the order.
Held: The purpose of a freezing order is to avoid dissipation of a . .
Cited – The Myrto ChD 1977
A ship had been charged. A third party sought to arrest the ship for a debt.
Held: ‘Where the owner makes a contract with a third party for the employment of the ship, of such a kind and made or performable in such circumstances, that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234735

Commission v United Kingdom C-385/04: ECJ 10 Nov 2005

CJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2001/16/EC – Trans-European Networks – Interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system – Failure to transpose within the period prescribed

Citations:

[2005] EUECJ C-385/04, ECLI:EU:C:2005:679

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2001/16/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Transport

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234705

County Road Trustees of Lower Ward of Lanark v Fleming and Another (Kelvinside Trustees): HL 12 Nov 1886

Road – Road Trustees – Power to Light Roads – Roads and Bridges Act 1878 (41 and 42 Vict. c. 51, sec. 119, and Schedule C – Great Western Road Act (6 and 7 Will. IV. cap. cxxxviii), secs. 14 and 23
Held (rev. judgment of Second Division) that county road trustees under the Roads and Bridges Act 1878-which declares that such trustees shall be liable in all the debts, liabilities, claims, and demands in which the trustees under previous local Acts were liable, and shall be bound to expend their assessments in ‘maintaining and repairing’ highways under their jurisdiction-are not bound or entitled to expend their statutory funds raised by assessment in lighting roads within their jurisdiction, whether such roads were previously lighted by the former trustees or not, the duty of lighting not being any part of the ‘maintenance or repair’ of roads.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor Halsbury, Lord Blackburn, and Lord Watso

Citations:

[1886] UKHL 50, 24 SLR 50

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Transport, Local Government

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.637738

Strabag (Law Relating To Undertakings): ECJ 16 Jun 2005

ECJ Public procurement contracts – Directive 93/38/EEC – Water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors – Concepts of ‘operation’ and ‘provision’ of networks providing a service to the public in the field of transport by railway – Railway infrastructure works.

Citations:

C-462/03, [2005] EUECJ C-462/03

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 93/38/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Utilities

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.226969

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd. v Furness Withy (Australia) Pty (“Doric Pride”): ComC 20 May 2005

Dispute about the meaning and effect of an ‘off hire’ clause in a single trip time charter.

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 945 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At ComC – Hyundai Merchant Marine Co Ltd v Furness Withy (Australia) Pty (‘Doric Pride’) CA 25-Jan-2006
The court considered the relationship between express an implied warranties.
Held: Under a time charterparty, hire continues to run unless the charterer can bring himself within the plain words of an off-hire provision; the risk of delay is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.226009

Lady Navigation Inc v Lauritzencool Ab and Another: CA 17 May 2005

The shipowner appealed the award against them of an injunction requiring them not to act inconsistently with a time charterparty. The company said that such a form of order was improper.
Held: The existence of the contract to do what was required did not prevent an injunction being granted to achieve the same result. Scaptrade was authority for the proposition that specific performance would not be ordered in respect of a time charterparty. However the relief appealed against was jurisdictionally different. Though a time charterparty was seen as a contract for services, there was no principle to exclude negative injunctive relief to prevent activity inconsistent with the terms: ‘neither the fact that the contracts involved were for services in the form of a time charter nor the existence under such contracts of a fiduciary relationship of mutual trust and confidence represents in law any necessary or general objection in principle to the grant of injunctive relief precluding the appellants from employing their vessels outside the pool pending the outcome of the current arbitration. Nor does it afford any such objection to the grant of such relief that the only realistic commercial course which it left to the appellants was, as I am prepared to assume, to do what they have done, namely to continue to provide the vessels to the pool and to perform the charters. In my judgment, therefore, the present appeal by each appellant should be dismissed. ‘

Judges:

Judge, Manse, Thomas LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 579, Times 26-May-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – De Mattos v Gibson 1859
The purchaser of an interest in property may not use it so as to breach contractual rights of which he was aware when he acquired the interest. . .
Appeal from – Lauritzencool Ab v Lady Navigation Inc ComC 12-Nov-2004
The court awarded interim injunctive relief to the effect that the shipowners should not act inconsistently with a time charterparty of two vessels. . .
Cited – Lumley v Wagner 1852
A girl (under age) and her father contracted for her to perform at a theatre abroad, and later not to use her talents without the consent of her manager. She contracted with a competing theatre. She resisted an action by the manager saying that the . .
Cited – Scandinavian Trading Tanker Co AB v Flota Petrolera Ecuatoriana (The Scaptrade) HL 1983
The House considered giving relief from forfeiture where an owner had justifiably withdrawn his vessel in accordance with the terms of the charter.
Held: A withdrawal clause under a time charter, exercised on the ground of the charterer’s . .
Cited – Lord Strathcona Steamship Co Ltd v Dominion Coal Co Ltd HL 1926
. .
Cited – Whitwood Chemical Co v Hardman 1891
The court looked to an appointment for a 10 year term as a manufacturing chemist as manager of the plaintiff company’s works.
Held: If negative injunctive relief was granted ‘the man must either be idle, or specifically perform the agreement . .
Cited – In re Regent Hotels (UK) Ltd v Pageguide Ltd CA 10-May-1985
The court was concerned with a long-term management contract for the Dorchester Hotel between Regent as managers and Pageguide. When Regent sold the hotel to Pageguide the management contract would continue and be novated (with some amendment) as . .
Cited – Warren v Mendy CA 1989
A boxing manager and promoter sought injunctive relief to restrain the defendant from interfering with a management contract between himself and B, a talented young boxer, and from acting for B in B’s professional career. B was at his request joined . .
Cited – Page One Records Ltd v Britton 1967
The court was asked to consider a five year contract to manage a pop group, in respect of which contract the manager claimed injunctive relief to prevent the group working outside the agreement.
Held: The injunction was refused. The manager . .
Cited – Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd v Teigland Shipping A/S (The Oakworth) 1975
. .
Mentioned – Empresa Cubana de Fletes v Lagonisi Shipping Co Ltd (The Georgios C) 1971
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Arbitration

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224922

Barras v Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co: HL 17 Mar 1933

The court looked at the inference that a statute’s draughtsman could be assumed when using a phrase to rely on a known interpretation of that phrase.
Viscount Buckmaster said: ‘It has long been a well established principle to be applied in the consideration of Acts of Parliament that where a word of doubtful meaning has received a clear judicial interpretation, the subsequent statute which incorporates the same word or the same phrase in a similar context must be construed so that the word or phrase is interpreted according to the meaning that has previously been assigned to it.’

Judges:

Viscount Buckmaster, Lord Russell of Killowen,Lord Macmillan

Citations:

[1933] UKHL 3, (1933) 45 Ll L Rep 199, [1933] All ER Rep 52, 1933 SC (HL) 21, [1933] AC 402, 1933 SLT 338

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Merchant Shipping (International Labour Conventions) Act, 1925 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General (ex relatione Yorkshire Derwent Trust Ltd) v Brotherton HL 5-Dec-1991
The appellants owned land through which flowed the river Derwent. Attempts were to be made to restore the river to navigability. The appellants denied that any public rights existed over the river.
Held: The 1932 Act could only give rise to a . .
Cited – A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 12-Apr-2006
Each claimant sought damages for a criminal assault for which the defendant was said to be responsible. Each claim was to be out of the six year limitation period. In the first claim, the proposed defendant had since won a substantial sum from the . .
Explained – Regina v Chard HL 1983
The defendant appealed his conviction which had been obtained but based upon the evidence of a ‘super-grass’. His appeal failed, but the witness then withdrew his evidence. The matter was referred back to the court under the section, which then . .
Cited – Gallagher (Valuation Officer) v Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints HL 30-Jul-2008
The House considered whether certain properties of the Church were subject to non-domestic rating. Various buildings were on the land, and the officer denied that some fell within the exemptions, and in particular whether the Temple itself was a . .
Cited – Adorian v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 23-Jan-2009
The claimant received injuries when arrested. He was later convicted of resisting arrest. The defendant relied on section 329 of the 2003 Act. The claimant said that the force used against him was grossly disproportionate. The commissioner appealed . .
Cited – Transport for London (London Underground Ltd) v Spirerose Ltd HL 30-Jul-2009
Compulsory Purchase Compensation – Land As it Is
The House considered the basis of calculation of compensation on the compulsory purchase of land without planning permission, but where permission would probably be granted. The appellant challenged the decision which had treated the probability as . .
Cited – Carey v HSBC Bank plc, Yunis v Barclays Bank plc and similar QBD 23-Dec-2009
(Manchester Mercantile Court) The court considered the effects in detail where a bank was unable to comply with a request under section 78 of the 1974 Act to provide a copy of the agreement signed by the client.
Held: The court set out to give . .
Applied – BBC Scotland v Souster SCS 7-Dec-2000
English and Scottish are Separate Racial Groups
The English and Scottish peoples are recognised as separate racial groups. Discrimination on the basis that someone was English or Scottish was therefore discrimination for the purposes of the 1976 Act. Since Parliament had not amended or defined . .
Cited – ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham SC 12-Nov-2014
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under . .
Cited – Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Sep-2016
Executors appealed against a decision that a residual gift in a will was not charitable and that it was therefore subject to Inheritance Tax arguing that the section if construed in this way was an unlawful restriction on the free movement of . .
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .
Cited – Lalchan, Regina v CACD 27-May-2022
Conviction withoiut required Consent was Unsafe
Whether a conviction for an offence which requires the consent of the Attorney General before the proceedings are instituted can stand when no such consent was obtained.
Held: The appellant’s arguments were well-founded and his conviction on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Employment, Transport, Litigation Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.279695

Quantum Corporation Inc and Others v Plane Trucking Ltd and Another: CA 27 Mar 2002

A valuable cargo was stolen whilst being transported. Part of the journey was by road, and part by air. The carriers sought to limit their liability, because of the provisions of the Act and Convention. It was argued that that did not apply, because part of the journey had been by air, and part only by road. Did liability depend upon the carrier having explicitly contracted to transport part way by road, and could a convention contract include a part transport by means other than road?
Held: The Convention applied to a ‘contract for the carriage of goods by road’. Authority established that the Convention applied where the carrier either promised unconditionally to carry by road, and on a trailer, possibly reserving an option to transport by different means for all or part of the way and left the means open, so that carriage by road was a possibility. It applied here, and remained open to the claimants to argue under article 29 that the limitation should not apply because of the way it had happened.

Judges:

Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Mance and Lord Justice Latham

Citations:

Times 18-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 350, [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 25, [2002] 1 WLR 2678, [2003] 1 All ER 873, [2002] 2 All ER (Comm) 392

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road Art 1, 17, 29, Carriage of Goods by Road Act 1965

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Datec Electronics Holdings Ltd and others v United Parcels Services Ltd HL 16-May-2007
The defendants had taken on the delivery of a quantity of the claimant’s computers. The equipment reached one depot, but then was lost or stolen. The parties disputed whether the Convention rules applied. UPS said that the claimant had agreed that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Transport

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.169835

Regina (Seahawk Marine Foods Ltd) v Southampton Port Health Authority: CA 31 Jan 2002

The company sought to import shrimps. The Port Authority had refused entry on the basis that they did not comply with standards of the Directive. The ‘aerobic colony counts’ in the condemned product exceeded the standards. The regulation did not require there to be shown actual danger, but only potential danger to public health. This accorded with public policy. The appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Mummery, Buxton and Longmore LLJ

Citations:

Times 05-Feb-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 54

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Products of Animal Origin (Import and Export) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996 No 3124) 25, Fishery Products Directive (Council Directive 91/493/EEC)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Seahawk Marine Foods Limited v Southampton Port Health Authority Admn 5-Apr-2001
The authority refused to allow disembarkment of a cargo of shrimp. It’s risk assessment was based on failures by the cargo processor, but which failures did not create any risk to public health. The court held that the rejection could be challenged . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Seahawk Marine Foods Limited v Southampton Port Health Authority Admn 5-Apr-2001
The authority refused to allow disembarkment of a cargo of shrimp. It’s risk assessment was based on failures by the cargo processor, but which failures did not create any risk to public health. The court held that the rejection could be challenged . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Consumer

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.167553

United Trade Action Group Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Transport for London and Another: Admn 20 Jan 2021

Judges:

Mrs Justice Lang

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 72 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – United Trade Action Group Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Transport for London and Another (Evidence) Admn 20-Jan-2021
Ruling on the admissibility of evidence in two consolidated claims for judicial review. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Transport

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.657331

Hogarth and Others v Miller, Brother, and Co: HL 1 Dec 1891

Ship – Charter-Party – Freight – Payment of Hire to Cease if Working of Vessel Stopped until Efficient to Resume Service – General Average.
A charterer undertook to pay a certain hire per month for a steamship, the owners undertook to provide officers, crew, and stores. The charter-party provided-‘In the event of loss of time from deficiency of men or stores, breakdown of machinery, want of repairs, or damage, whereby the working of the vessel is stopped for more than 48 consecutive working hours, the payment of hire shall cease until she be again in an efficient state to resume her service.’
On the voyage the high-pressure engine broke down, and the vessel put into Las Palmas, where she was pronounced unseaworthy. As the port afforded no means of repair the owners and charterers agreed to send a tug from England to bring her to her destination at Harburg, and to regard the cost as general average. The vessel made that port with the aid of the tug and her low-pressure engine. The charterer paid pounds 867 as his share of general average.
The shipowner sued the charterer for hire from the time the vessel left Las Palmas with the tug till she was discharged of her cargo at Harburg. The Second Division held ( rev. Lord Trayner) that while the owners were not entitled to hire from Las Palmas to Harburg, they were entitled to payment while the ship was necessarily engaged in discharging cargo-four days or pounds 60 being taken as a reasonable view.
Held ( per the Lord Chancellor (Halsbury) and Lords Watson and Herschell) that no hire was due from Las Palmas to Harburg, but that the full ten days actually occupied in discharge of cargo should be paid for.
Lord Bramwell concurred in the latter but not in the former view.
Lord Morris was of opinion that no hire at all should be paid.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), and Lords Watson, Herschell, Bramwell, and Morris

Citations:

[1891] UKHL 583, 28 SLR 583

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Transport

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.636786

M’Cowan v Baine and Johnston: HL 27 Jul 1891

Insurance – Maritime Policy – Construction – Vessel under Tow – Collision with Tug.
A ship was insured ‘from the Clyde (in tow) to Cardiff’ upon a policy which bore that ‘if the ship hereby insured shall come into collision with any other ship or vessel, and the insured shall in consequence thereof become liable to pay, and shall pay, to the persons interested in such other ship or vessel . . any sum of money, . . we (the underwriters) will pay the assured three-fourths of the sum so paid.’ A tug while towing said ship collided with another vessel and sank it. Both the tug and the tow were by the Admiralty Court in England found liable in damages to the owners of the vessel sunk.
Held ( aff. the decision of the Second Division- diss. Lord Bramwell) that the owners of the tow were entitled to recover under the policy of insurance, although the tow had not itself been directly in collision.

Judges:

Earl of Selborne, and Lords Watson, Bramwell, and Morris

Citations:

[1891] UKHL 943, 28 SLR 943

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Insurance

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.636781

Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishika Kaisha; ‘the Golden Victory’: TCC 15 Feb 2005

The parties had agreed a charterparty. The defendant repudiated the charter, but the Gulf War in 2003 meant that the the contract would have been frustrated in any event shortly afterwards.
Held: The assessment of damages for repudiation of a long-term charterparty must make allowance for the supervening event, to allow the importance of achieving an assessment of damages and compensation which more properly reflected the actual loss which could be seen to have been suffered. There was no separate standard of proof. No member of the court in the Mihailis Angelos had claimed to lay down a general rule applying in all cases in repudiation where there was an available market.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Langley

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 161 (Comm), Times 04-Mar-2005, [2005] 1 All ER (Comm) 467

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Maredelanto Compania Naviera SA v BergbauHandel GmbH (The Mihalis Angelos) CA 1-Jul-1970
The parties had agreed a charterparty. The ship was to sail to Haiphong to load a cargo for delivery in Europe. The charterer had a right to cancel if the vessel was not ready on a certain date, but a few days earlier they repudiated the charter. . .
Cited – B S and N Limited (BVI) v Micado Shipping Limited (Malta) (‘The Seaflower’) CA 22-Nov-2000
. .
See Also – Nippon Yusen Kubishiki Kaisha v Golden Strait Corporation ComC 17-Jan-2003
The parties entered into a charterparty. The court was now asked how that might be determined under its terms. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishika Kaisha; ‘the Golden Victory’ CA 18-Oct-2005
Measurement of damages for repudiatory breach.
The parties had entered into a charter which was intended to last seven years. The charterers broke the charterparty. A war later occurred which would have cut the contract short in any event.
At First Instance – Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Damages

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222781

Montpeliers and Trevors Association, Regina (on the Application of) v City of Westminster: Admn 13 Jan 2005

Traffic regulation scheme.
Held: In consulting about an increase in airport capacity in South East England, the government had acted unlawfully in consulting upon possible development only at Heathrow, Stansted and the Thames estuary and not also at Gatwick.

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 16 (Admin), [2006] LGR 304

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic, Transport, Administrative

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222030

Jones (T/A Shamrock Coaches) v Department of Transport Welsh Traffic Office: CA 18 Jan 2005

After complaints about the applicant’s conduct of her coach business licensed under the 1981 Act, he was investigated. The issue was taken to a public enquiry before the traffic commissioner, which concluded that congestion and the state of the roads was not sufficient to reasonably excuse the failings in the service under s68. The applicant appealed to the transport tribunal which allowed the appeal and remitted the case. After the second hearing, there was a dispute as to the duties on the tribunal on such a remission.
Held: The Transport tribunal had an unrestricted jurisdiction as to basis of a remission of the case, and it was not a necessary inference that there was to be a full rehearing. The applicant contended that to remit her case to the same tribunal amounted to a denial of her right to a fair trial. This could not be supported. There was no suggestion that the commissioner had acted unfairly. If the tribunal had intended the case to be reheard before a different commissioner, and with he additional expense, it could have said so and would have said so.

Judges:

Judge, Smith, Jacob LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 58, Times 24-Jan-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 26 68, Transport Act 1985 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222042

New Zealand Shipping Co Ltd v A M Satterthwaite and Co Ltd (The Eurymedon): PC 25 Feb 1974

The Board considered the extent to which an exclusion clause in a bill of lading could be relied on by the third party stevedore, an independent contractor employed by the carrier, who was sued by the consignees of goods for negligently damaging the goods while unloading them.
Held: (Majority) The board gave effect to the clause by regarding the shipper as having made an offer of a unilateral contract to the stevedores to unload the goods on terms incorporating the exclusion clause. This offer was accepted by the stevedores by commencing work.
Lord Wilberforce said that the bill of lading: ‘ brought into existence a bargain initially unilateral but capable of becoming mutual, between the shipper and the [stevedores], made through the carrier as agent. This became a full contract when the [stevedores] performed services by discharging the goods. The performance of these services for the benefit of the shipper was the consideration for the agreement by the shipper that the [stevedores] should have the benefit of the exemptions and limitations contained in the bill of lading.’ The exclusion clause was entered into by the carrier as agent for its servants, agents and independent contractors, and therefore ‘the exemption is designed to cover the whole carriage from loading to discharge, by whomsoever it is performed: the performance attracts the exemption or immunity in favour of whoever the performer turns out to be’. Also ‘In the opinion of their Lordships, to give the appellant the benefit of the exemptions and limitations contained in the bill of lading is to give effect to the clear intentions of a commercial document, and can be given within existing principles. They see no reason to strain the law or the facts in order to defeat these intentions. It should not be overlooked that the effect of denying validity to the clause would be to encourage actions against servants, agents and independent contractors in order to get round exemptions… ‘

Judges:

Lord Wilberforce

Citations:

[1975] AC 154, [1974] UKPC 1, [1974] UKPC 4

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – The Mahkutai PC 24-Apr-1996
(Hong Kong) The question was whether shipowners, who were not parties to the bill of lading contract between the charterers and carriers on the one part, and the cargo-owners, the bill of lading being a charterer’s bill, could enforce against the . .
Cited – Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corporation CA 25-Apr-1977
The plaintiff offered to sell a machine tool to the defendant. The offer said that its terms had precedence over any terms in the buyer’s order, and contained a clause allowing a price variation. The defendant’s order form allowed no variation, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Transport, Commonwealth, Contract

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.221974

Sweet v Owners of Blyth Lifeboat; The Edward Duke of Windsor: QBD 22 Jan 2002

A claim which was covered by the Act for damages for psychiatric injury arose not at the date of the accident, but from when the claimant first developed a recognised psychiatric injury. The two year period of limitation under the Act ran accordingly from the later date. Had parliament wished another result, it could easily have been provided for. Instead it made a clear distinction between the date of the accident, and the date of the injury resulting from it.

Judges:

Mr Justice Tomlinson

Citations:

Times 22-Feb-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002

Statutes:

Merchant Shipping Act 1995 190(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Limitation, Personal Injury, Transport

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.167649

United Trade Action Group Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Transport for London and Another (Evidence): Admn 20 Jan 2021

Ruling on the admissibility of evidence in two consolidated claims for judicial review.

Judges:

Mrs Justice Lang

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 73 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – United Trade Action Group Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Transport for London and Another Admn 20-Jan-2021
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Planning, Evidence

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.657332

Ross v Ryanair Ltd and Another: CA 21 Dec 2004

The claimant said that the airline and airport had failed to provide proper access arrangements for him as a disabled person. No wheelchair had been provided to transfer him through the airport to the airplane.
Held: It was the duty of both defendants to provide such facilities. It was no defence that better facilities were provided for more seriously disabled travellers, and the claimants financial ability to provide his own services was equally irrelevant. Both defendants were 100% liable, and the damages were to be paid equally.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke Vice-President Of The Court Of Appeal (Civil Division) Lord Justice Jonathan Parker And Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1751, Times 11-Jan-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 1349

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Roads v Central Trains Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The court considered the meaning of the ‘duty to provide a reasonable alternative method’.
Held: The policy of the 1995 Act was to provide access to a service as close as it was reasonable possible to get to the standard offered to the public . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Transport

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.220527

Jindal Iron and Steel Co Ltd and others v Islamic Solidarity Shipping Company Jordan Inc (“The Jordan II”): HL 25 Nov 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 than fifty years.
Held: There was no sufficient reason for departing from the rule in Renton. The House had to be aware that many commercial contracts had been put in place in reliance upon the existing interpretation, and other parties would be affected. Any change ought to make allowance for each of those interests. A review was current by UNCITRAL, and the House refused to overturn the long standing interpretation of the rules.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Steyn Lord Hoffmann Lord Scott of Foscote

Citations:

[2004] UKHL 49, Times 26-Nov-2004, [2005] 1 WLR 1363, [2005] 1 All ER 175

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Hague-Visby Rules A2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 article III, r. 2 of the Hague-Visby Rules was not to override freedom of contract to . .
Appeal from – Jindal Iron and Steel Co Ltd and others v Islamic Solidarity Company Jordan Inc and Another CA 13-Feb-2003
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 . .
Cited – Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) HL 1966
The House gave guidance how it would treat an invitation to depart from a previous decision of the House. Such a course was possible, but the direction was not an ‘open sesame’ for a differently constituted committee to prefer their views to those . .
Cited – The Ciechocinek CA 1976
. .
Cited – The Coral CA 1993
. .
Cited – The Holstencruiser 1992
. .
Cited – The Arawa 1977
. .
Cited – The Panaghia Tinnou 1986
. .
Cited – The Strathnewton CA 1983
. .
Cited – The Filikos 1981
. .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Her Majesty’s Prison Brockhill ex parte Evans (No 2) HL 27-Jul-2000
The release date for a prisoner was calculated correctly according to guidance issued by the Home Office, but case law required the guidance to be altered, and the prisoner had been detained too long. The tort of false imprisonment is one of strict . .
Cited – Vallejo v Wheeler 1774
Lord Mansfield said: ‘In all mercantile transactions the great object should be certainty: and therefore, it is of more consequence that a rule should be certain, than whether the rule is established one way or the other. Because speculators in . .
Cited – Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’) HL 13-Mar-2003
Cargo owners sought damages for their cargo which had been damaged aboard the ship. The contract had been endorsed with additional terms. That variation may have changed the contract from a charterer’s to a shipowner’s bill.
Held: The specific . .
Cited – Chandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller Co Inc CA 1950
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, . .
Cited – Regina v G and R HL 16-Oct-2003
The defendants, young boys, had set fire to paper and thrown the lit papers into a wheelie bin, expecting the fire to go out. In fact substantial damage was caused. The House was asked whether a conviction was proper under the section where the . .
Cited – Brys and Gylsen v J and J Drysdale and Co 1920
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 . .
Cited – Chandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller Co Inc CA 1950
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, . .
Cited – Fothergill v Monarch Airlines Ltd HL 10-Jul-1980
The plaintiff, on arriving at the airport found that his luggage had been lost. The defendant denied liability saying he had not notified his claim within the requisite period.
Held: Elementary justice requires that the rules by which the . .
Cited – Riverstone Meat Co Pty Ltd v Lancashire Shipping Co Ltd HL 1961
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 . .

Cited by:

Cited – Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
Cited – Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219871

Brentwood Borough Council v Gladen: Admn 28 Oct 2004

The defendant taxi operator was telephoned, and cabs were booked, and those bookings were fulfilled by providing licensed hackney carriages with licensed hackney carriage drivers. He was accused of knowingly operating the vehicles as private hire vehicles in a controlled district without a current operator’s licence under section 55 of the 1976 Act contrary to section 46(1)(d) and (2). The council appealed by way of case stated dismissal of their prosecutions under the Act of Mr Gladen for providing pre-booked private hire. The prosecution claimed he needed a license as a private hire operator in addition to the license he had under the 1847 Act.
Held: The District Judge had been correct. Section 46(1)(d) is not breached where a licensed hackney carriage and a licensed hackney carriage driver is provided for the relevant conveyance of a passenger, albeit it is provided through an operator. In those circumstances, an operator’s licence under section 55 of the Act is not appropriate, since that section does not cover hackney carriages.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2500 (Admin), Times 01-Nov-2004, [2005] RTR 12

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 55, Town Police Clauses Act 1847

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Heath 16-Oct-2000
It was submitted that the schemes relating to hackney carriages and private hire vehicles were two distinct schemes, and that the issues in that case had arisen because the Council had fallen into the trap of seeking to apply private hire statutory . .
Cited – Benson v Boyce Admn 20-Jan-1997
‘Looking at the other subsections of section 46, the first applies to a proprietor of a vehicle who uses or permits it to be used in a controlled district as a private hire vehicle without having a licence for it as such under section 48. The phrase . .

Cited by:

Cited – Newcastle City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Berwick-Upon-Tweed Borough Council and others Admn 5-Nov-2008
The applicant council complained that the respondent council was issuing a disproportionately high number of taxi licences, believing that it should only refuse a licence where the driver appeared to be unfit.
Held: The purpose of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Transport

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219259