References: [2004] UKHL 49, Times 26-Nov-2004, [2005] 1 WLR 1363, [2005] 1 All ER 175
Links: Bailii, House of Lords
Coram: Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Steyn Lord Hoffmann Lord Scott of Foscote
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.
Statutes: Hague-Visby Rules A2
This case cites:
- Cited – Pyrene Co Ltd -v- Scindia Navigation Co Ltd QBD ([1954] 2 QB 402)
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 (Bailii, [2003] EWCA Civ 144, [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 87)
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] 3 All ER 77, [1966] 1 WLR 1234)
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] 1 Lloyds Rep 489)
. . - Cited – The Coral CA ([1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1)
. . - Cited – The Holstencruiser ([1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 378)
. . - Cited – The Arawa ([1977] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 416)
. . - Cited – The Panaghia Tinnou ([1986] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 586)
. . - Cited – The Strathnewton CA ([1983] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 219)
. . - Cited – The Filikos ([1981] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 555)
. . - Cited – Regina -v- Governor of Her Majesty’s Prison Brockhill ex parte Evans (No 2) HL (Times 02-Aug-00, House of Lords, Gazette 17-Aug-00, Bailii, [2000] 3 WLR 843, [2001] 2 AC 19, [2000] UKHL 48, [2000] 4 All ER 15, [2000] UKHRR 836)
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) 1 Cowp 143)
‘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 trade then know what . . - Cited – Homburg Houtimport BV -v- Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’) HL (House of Lords, [2003] UKHL 12, Bailii, Times 17-Mar-03, Gazette 15-May-03, [2003] 2 WLR 711, [2004] 1 AC 715, [2003] 1 CLC 921, 2003 AMC 913, [2003] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 571, [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 625, [2003] 2 All ER 785, [2003] 1 LLR 571)
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 ([1951] 1 KB 240, (1950) 2 All ER 618, (1950) 84 Lloyds Rep 347)
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 (House of Lords, [2003] UKHL 50, Bailii, Times 17-Oct-03, Gazette 13-Nov-03, [2003] 3 WLR 1060, [2004] 1 AC 1034, Bailii, (2003) 167 JP 621, (2003) 167 JPN 955, [2004] 1 Cr App R 21, [2003] 4 All ER 765)
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 & Gylsen -v- J and J Drysdale & Co ((1920) 4 Ll L Rep 24)
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 ([1951] 1 KB 240, (1950) 2 All ER 618, (1950) 84 Lloyds Rep 347)
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 ([1980] 2 All ER 696, [1980] 3 WLR 209, [1981] AC 251, mercatoria, Bailii, [1980] UKHL 6)
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] AC 807)
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 . .
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Golden Strait Corporation -v- Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL (Bailii, [2007] UKHL 12, Times 30-Mar-07, [2007] 2 Lloyds Rep 164, [2007] Bus LR 997, [2007] 3 All ER 1, [2007] 2 AC 353, [2007] 1 CLC 352, [2007] 2 WLR 691, [2007] 2 All ER (Comm) 97)
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 (Bailii, [2007] UKHL 12, Times 30-Mar-07, [2007] 2 Lloyds Rep 164, [2007] Bus LR 997, [2007] 3 All ER 1, [2007] 2 AC 353, [2007] 1 CLC 352, [2007] 2 WLR 691, [2007] 2 All ER (Comm) 97)
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 . .