A cargo of beans was delivered damaged by seawater. The beans had been wetted when the vessel was involved in a collision. She put into Liverpool for repairs, and it was proved that it would have been reasonable for the master temporarily to discharge the beans there, so that they could be spread out and dried in a warehouse, and then reloaded before the vessel proceeded on her voyage. If that had been done, part of the damage would have been avoided. The bill of lading excepted ‘loss or damage arising from . . accidents of the seas’. The court held that the exception did not protect the carrier from liability for that part of the damage which could have been avoided by the exercise of due care.
Held: There is a duty on the master of a ship, as representing the shipowner, to take reasonable care of the goods intrusted to him, not merely in doing what is necessary to preserve them on hoard the ship during the ordinary incidents of the voyage, but also in taking active measures, where reasonably practicable under all the circumstances, to check and arrest the loss’ or deterioration resulting from accidents, for the necessary and immediate consequences of which the shipowner is not liable by reason of exceptions in the bill of lading. And for neglect of this duty by the master the shipowner is responsible to the shipper.
Willes J said: ‘In the result it appears to us that the duty of the master, in this respect, is . . to take reasonable care of the goods intrusted to him, not merely in doing what is necessary to preserve them on board the ship during the ordinary incidents of the voyage, but also in taking reasonable measures to check and arrest their loss, destruction, or deterioration, by reason of accidents, for the necessary effects of which there is, by reason of the exception in the bill of lading, no original liability. . . [T]he exemption is from liability for loss which could not have been avoided by reasonable care, skill, and diligence, and that it is inapplicable to the case of a loss arising from the want of such care, and the sacrifice of the cargo by reason thereof, which is the subject-matter of the present complaint.’
Willes J
(1871-1872) LR 7 QB 225, [1872] UKLawRpKQB 19
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Volcafe Ltd and Others v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores Sa SC 5-Dec-2018
The claimant appellants, arranged shipment of bagged Colombian green coffee beans, stowed in 20 unventilated 20-foot containers from Panama to Rotterdam, Hamburg or Bremerhaven for on carriage to Bremen. The bill of lading for each consignment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport
Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.670143