i-law.com

CARPENTER AND OTHERS v. EBBLEWHITE AND OTHERS.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 1

Motor insurance - Practice - Accident - Personal injuries suffered by plaintiffs in collision with car driven by B-Claim by plaintiffs against B and E, it being alleged that B was driving car as servant or agent of E-E insured with U. Insurance Company-Insurance company joined as defendants-Statement of claim delivered claiming damages against B and E and a declaration that the insurance company were obliged to satisfy any judgment obtained against either B or E- Application by insurance company that statement of claim, in so far as it related to them, be struck out on ground that it was vexatious and would embarrass the fair trial of the action-Contention by insurance company that at time of accident car had been sold by E to B-Whether fact of insurance should be disclosed to jury-Decision of Master granting application upheld by learned Judge in Chambers-Appeal by plaintiffs-Road Traffic Act, 1934, Sect. 10-R.S.C., Order 19, r. 27.

THE "EL NEPTUNO."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 7

International law - Ship - Arrest by Spanish Nationalist Government of Spanish steamer El Neptuno-Motion by Spanish Republican Government to set aside writ and arrest-Evidence of requisition by Republican Government under decree of 1937 and of subsequent history-Dedication to public use-Evidence of continuous inactivity of vessel.

PAXTON v. LOWEN.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 10

SAUNDERS v. WM. CORY & SON, LTD. (FARR, THIRD PARTY).

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 16

Negligence-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff while engaged in constructional work on River Lea-Plaintiff in employment of F-Defendants' barges emerging from tidal lock from River Thames into River Lea-Navigation obstructed by work-Barges hitched on to tug-Four barges in tow-Stopping of tug, causing tow to buckle and third barge to collide with baulk of timber intended to be used as protection for cofferdam (erected in connection with work) but not yet fixed in position-Baulk forced on to towpath, injuring plaintiff-Claim against defendants-Doubt whether tug had in fact commenced towing third barge-Res ipsa loquitur-Duty of barges emerging from lock-F joined by defendants as third party-Alleged liability as joint tortfeasor-Contention that protection afforded cofferdam by baulk was insufficient.

REARDON SMITH LINE, LTD. v. EAST ASIATIC COMPANY.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 23

Charter-party - Demurrage - Vessel chartered to proceed to Dairen and there load-"7. . . . Lay-days at port of loading to be weather working days, and to commence 24 hours after the steamer is dunnaged, matted, and all hatches are ready for cargo, whether in berth or not, and of the captain having given written notice . . . to that effect to charterers or their agents. 11. . . . If the cargo cannot be loaded by reason of . . . obstructions or stoppages beyond the control of the charterers . . . in the docks or other loading places . . . the time for loading . . . shall not count during the continuance of such causes. . . . 15. . . . If the steamer be not arrived at her loading berth at port of loading (charterers undertaking to provide an available berth as soon as required) . . . charterers to have the option of cancelling . . . ."-Delay in loading owing to requisition of number of berths by Government - Whether amounting to "obstruction" within meaning of Clause 11-Effect of Clauses 7 and 15-Arbitration-Award in favour of charterers.

THE "FORTUNE."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 29

Collision-Dock-Collision in broad daylight between plaintiffs' steam floating derrick and barge Kirk (in third rank on starboard side) in tow of defendants' tug in Royal Albert Dock - Derrick proceeding up dock towards Royal Victoria Dock, tug emerging from Connaught Road Cutting, on passage to Royal Albert Dock-Port helm signals sounded by tug and accepted by derrick - Contact between starboard bow of derrick and starboard quarter of Kirk -Duty of vessels navigating in dock-Whether tug should have taken more drastic port helm action.

THE "ORION."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 33

Admiralty practice-Priorities-Stranding of vessel-Discharge of cargo by cargo-owners-Vessel sold by order of Court-Claims on fund by cargo-owners and by master and crew-Order of learned Judge that claims should rank in order: (1) Admiralty Marshal's expenses; (2) costs of arrest; (3) claims by master and crew-Whether cargo-owners entitled to include costs of discharge in costs of arrest-Preservation of fund.

VIGERS BROTHERS, LTD. v. MONTAGUE L. MEYER, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 35

Arbitration - Award - Sole arbitrator - Validity of appointment - Whether matter with which arbitrator concerned himself was within submission-Sale of timber by defendants to plaintiffs c.i.f. London - Notice of claim given to defendants by plaintiffs upon unloading of timber-Offer of allowance by defendants-Offer refused by plaintiffs, with further intimation that "we must therefore give you [defendants] notice of arbitration and herewith appoint [C] to act on our behalf. We shall be pleased to hear whether you are prepared to accept this gentleman as sole arbitrator" - Plaintiffs informed by defendants that C was not acceptable as sole arbitrator - C subsequently instructed by plaintiffs to proceed with arbitration-Award that ownership of goods should revert to defendants and that they should refund to plaintiffs the amount paid for the timber and reimburse them in respect of all incidental expenses - Claim by plaintiffs to recover sum awarded-Whether C empowered to act - Further contention by defendants that C dealt with matters not within submission - Arbitration clause in contract providing that "In the event of either side failing to appoint their arbitrator within seven days after one party has appointed an arbitrator and requested the other to do so, the appointed arbitrator shall act as sole arbitrator in the dispute and his decision shall be final and binding upon both parties."

JOSEPH v. HARMER.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 41

Contract-Undertaking to insure-Breach -Two valuable stamps and two others of comparatively small value sent by plaintiff dealer (in Brussels) to defendant dealer (in London) by registered post - Valuable stamps alleged by plaintiff to have been abstracted from package while in post-Plaintiff's contention that defendant had failed to carry out his undertaking (appearing by way of advertisement in his catalogue) to insure senders of stamps against loss - Policy taken out by defendant on his own behalf - Effect of advertisement-Evidence of posting by plaintiff-Proof of loss.

REX v. ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE FOR WEST DERBY ASSESSMENT AREA AND ANOTHER (EX PARTE MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR BOARD).

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 49

Rating-Amendment of current valuation list-Appropriated berths, etc.-Proposals by rating authority that the various occupiers of property, hitherto assessed as an undivided hereditament in the occupation of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, should be separately assessed-Notice of such proposal to be given to occupier-Meaning of "occupier" - No notice served on Mersey Docks and Harbour Board as occupiers of whole, who therefore had no locus standi to appear before the assessment committee to state their objections-Rules nisi for writs of prohibition obtained by Board and directed to rating authority, requiring them to show cause why they should not be prohibited from proceeding with the proposed amendment of the current valuation list in respect of the Board's property-Rating and Valuation Act, 1925, Sect. 37.

THE "ARANTZAZU MENDI."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 55

International law-Ship-Arrest-Foreign Sovereign State - Requisition of Spanish vessel by Republican and Nationalist Governments of Spain-Action in rem for possession brought by Spanish Republican Government-Motion by Nationalist Government to set aside writ and warrant of arrest-Position of Nationalist Government of Spain considered-Recognition by His Majesty's Foreign Office as exercising de facto administrative control over larger portion of Spain-Port of registry within territory under control of Nationalist Government-Power of disposition and control by Nationalist Government conceded by owner and master of vessel.

DANIOLOS v. BUNGE & CO., LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 65

General average-Stranding-Claim by shipowner against cargo-owners to recover contribution in respect of extraordinary sacrifices and expenditure made by shipowner in refloating-Damage to hull and machinery-Danger of collision with passing vessels-Vessel on voyage to Randers-Stranding in Randers Fjord-Whether ship and cargo were in peril; and, if so, whether a general average act was performed-York-Antwerp Rules, 1924, Rule A.

SMITH, HOGG & CO., LTD. v. BLACK SEA & BALTIC GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 70

Charter-party-Unseaworthiness - General Average-Charter of vessel for voyage from Soroka to Garston-Timber cargo (including deckload) loaded at Soroka, vessel sailing with list of five degrees- Decision to take on board more bunkers at Stornoway - Arrival at Stornoway with list to starboard of 15 deg. - 16 tons of bunkers loaded, causing vessel to heel over to port - Vessel beached to prevent her sinking-Part of cargo lost and damaged-Claim by shipowners for general average contribution from cargo - Counterclaim by defendant insurance company (as guarantors for cargo) for loss and damage to cargo-"The shipowner shall not be liable for loss or damage arising or resulting from unseaworthiness unless caused by want of due diligence on the part of the shipowner to make the ship seaworthy, and to secure that the ship is properly manned, equipped and supplied, and to make the holds and all other parts of the ship in which goods are carried fit and safe for their reception, carriage and preservation. The shipowner shall not be responsible for loss or damage arising or resulting from: Act, neglect, or default of the master, mariner, pilot, or the servants of the shipowner in the navigation or in the management of the ship" - Whether due diligence exercised by shipowners-Onus of proof-Evidence of instability-Cause of loss.

THE "NAVEMAR."*

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 76

International law-Ship-Confiscation by Spanish Republic of Spanish vessel - Libel for possession brought by owners -Contention on behalf of Spanish Republic that the vessel, on arrival in American waters, was in the possession of the Spanish Republic and subject to their direction and control for use in the national public service, and that accordingly the vessel was not subject to process in the American Courts without the consent of the Spanish Republic and in the absence of such consent was immune from any such process -Vessel on time charter to American corporation, charter at time of alleged seizure still having six months to run- Decree of Spanish Republic authorising seizure on their behalf - Evidence of indorsements on the ship's roll and ship's register by Spanish Government representatives at Rosario and Buenos Aires, in accordance with decree, before arrival in American waters-Decision of District Court that the application on behalf of the Spanish Government seeking to set aside the decree granting possession to the owners must be refused, as there was no evidence of actual possession by some act of physical dominion or control on behalf of that Government, either before or after arrival in United States waters- Decision upheld by Supreme Court, with permission for further intervention by applicant for the purpose of asserting the Spanish Government's ownership and right of possession of the vessel-Additional proof adduced on behalf of Spanish Government.

WELCH v. ROYAL EXCHANGE ASSURANCE.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 83

Fire insurance-Liability of insurers- Non-fulfilment of conditions by assured-Condition precedent-Policy taken out by plaintiff with defendant Corporation-Claim under policy disputed - Arbitration-"The Corporation agrees (subject to the conditions contained herein or endorsed hereon, or otherwise expressed hereon, which conditions shall, so far as the nature of them respectively will permit, be deemed to be conditions precedent to the right of the insured to recover hereunder)" to indemnify the assured in case of damage by fire-"4. The insured shall also give to the Corporation all such proofs and information with respect to the claim as may reasonably be required, together with (if demanded) a statutory declaration of the truth of the claim and of any matters connected therewith. No claim under this policy shall be payable unless the terms of this condition have been complied with" - Information requested by Corporation as to bank accounts used and controlled by assured for purposes of his business- Failure by assured on making claim to give information of bank accounts (in mother's name) which were used and controlled by him for the purposes of

his business-Full information supplied to Corporation by assured during hearing of arbitration-Amendment of points of defence-Contention by Corporation that assured's failure to disclose information regarding accounts constituted a breach of Condition 4 and precluded assured from recovering - Finding by arbitrator that there was no fraudulent concealment and that the accounts, when disclosed, did not contain any material justifying repudiation by the Corporation -Award that Condition 4 was a condition precedent to the Corporation's liability; and that the failure by the assured to give the information regarding the accounts was a breach of that condition and disentitled the assured to recover-Case stated.

THE "PORT NICHOLSON."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 92

River-Turning in river-Collision between tug Ocean Cock and steamship Port Nicholson in Gravesend Reach, River Thames-Tug sunk with loss of four lives-Tug, bound down, turning to cross river under port helm; Port Nicholson bound down-Contact between stem of Port Nicholson and port side of tug - Duty of tug in such circumstances-Signal of four and two sounded, followed by starboard helm signal when athwart-Look-out-Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rules 23, 34. Signals - Tug athwart river during process of turning - Starboard helm signal sounded - Indication to vessels proceedings up and down river.

THE "INVENTOR."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 101

River - Overtaking - Collision between Esthonian steamship Maret and British steamship Inventor in Gravesend Reach, River Thames-Both vessels bound up, Maret being ahead of Inventor-Sheer by Maret-Danger of collision with anchored vessel-Engines put "full astern" and anchor dropped-Maret brought up angled across river, gradually swinging more athwart, but still making sternway farther into river-Contact between stern of Maret and port side of Inventor at angle of about seven points-Look-out-Signals -Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rule 24.

THE "FAIRPLAY XIV."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 108

Admiralty practice - Counterclaim - Limitation of action-Collision in German waters between plaintiff's yacht Snowbird and defendants' tug Fairplay XIV on Sept. 4, 1936-Yacht sunk-Tug employed in German waters -Arrested by plaintiff immediately upon arrival at English port on Aug. 23, 1938-Appearance entered by defendants on Aug. 31-Failure of defendants to issue cross-writ or institute counterclaim within statutory period-Motion by defendants for special leave to prosecute counterclaim -Admiralty Court Act, 1861, Sect. 34 -Maritime Conventions Act, 1911, Sect. 8.

SIR R. ROPNER & CO., LTD. v. BUNGE NORTH AMERICAN GRAIN CORPORATION.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 111

Charter-party-Demurrage-"Obstructions or stoppages beyond the control of the charterers"-Vessel chartered to load grain at Mobile-Ordered by charterers on arrival to load at elevator berth- Elevator berth not available owing to congestion-Detention of vessel-Evidence that charterers offered to load by ship's tackle at another berth if owners would defray extra cost, but that owners refused-Custom of port-Claim by owners for demurrage-Arbitration- Award that cargo could not be loaded by reason of obstructions beyond the control of the charterers in the docks or other loading places; that the detention of the vessel did not occur by default of the charterers or their agents; and that therefore the claim failed-Case stated-Formal application by charterers for confirmation of award.

THE "HARTLEPOOL."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 117

Collision-River-Anchored vessel-Fog- Collision between steamships Petrel and Hartlepool in Halfway Reach during fog - Petrel swinging to her anchor; Hartlepool bound down - Serious damage to Petrel, vessel having to be beached - Petrel, bound down, anchored soon after entering bank of fog-Method of anchoring - Petrel allowed to swing to anchor on ebb tide -Contact between stem of Hartlepool and starboard side of Petrel, which had not completed her swing and was lying athwart channel-Speed of Hartlepool -Look-out.

COURT LINE, LTD. v. CANADIAN TRANSPORT COMPANY, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 123

Charter-party - Indemnity - Damage to cargo-Liability of shipowners to receivers-Receivers paid by shipowners' club-Claim by shipowners to recover full amount from time-charterers; alternatively, £10 franchise which shipowners were required to refund to club -Implied obligation of time-charterers -Clause 8 of charter providing that "Owners to give time-charterers the benefit of their protection and indemnity club insurances as far as club rules allow, and in case of shortage or damage to cargo, charterers to bear the franchise according to the club rules, which owners would otherwise have borne"-Club rules providing by Rule 17 that "No assignment or subrogation by a member of his cover with this Association to charterers or any other person shall be deemed to bind this Association to any extent whatsoever"-Effect of Rule 17.

A. L. STURGE & CO. AND OTHERS v. EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., AND OTHERS.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 128

Insurance-Bonds-Investments by Lloyd's underwriters in Canadian bonds- Option by holders to claim payment of principal and interest either in Canadian or United States dollars - Bonds containing gold clause - Policies taken out by underwriters with defendant insurance companies-Two classes of policies (A and B)-Class A policies guaranteeing "to the insured . . . the redemption of the principal at par not later than the 15th July, 1934, on stock/bonds specified in the schedule below. The company also guarantee full payment of the dividends upon the said stock/bonds at the rate of interest and upon the dates due as stated in the schedule"-Class B policies agreeing "to make good to the insured 50 per cent. of such sum or sums as the Government of British Columbia may fail to pay in cash in compliance with its obligations in respect of the insured's aforesaid holding in respect of (a) payment of interest at the rate and upon the dates due as stated in the schedule and (b) the principal sum payable on the maturity of the said stock as stated in the schedule"- Schedule specifying the securities insured, the sum insured and interest due in U.S. dollars-Bondholders paid in New York on "dollar for dollar" basis-Contention by bondholders that the issuers were under obligation to pay to the bondholders by way of principal and interest so many Canadian or U.S. paper dollars as would represent the gold value of the nominal amount of each respectively any that as they had been paid on a "dollar for dollar" basis they were entitled to be indemnified under their policies - Construction of policies-Effect of American and Canadian legislation.

THE "STAR OF THE ISLES."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 139

Collision-Breaking away from harbour moorings - Inevitable accident - Collision between pursuers' steam trawler Pelagos and defenders' steam trawler Star of the Isles in Oban Harbour- Pelagos moored starboard side to quay; Star of the Isles moored outside Pelagos -Breaking adrift of Star of the Isles during gale-Damage to Pelagos- Proof of damage-Plea by Star of the Isles of inevitable accident-Onus of proof-Evidence of moorings laid out by Star of the Isles-Whether sufficient -Allegation that Star of the Isles was insufficiently manned, resulting in her inability to use her engines at the critical time-Question of seamanship- Necessity for expert evidence-Measure of damage-Consideration of position where, by reason of tortious act causing damage, vessel has escaped damage which would probably have arisen independently of wrong-Procedure- Proof - Restriction to question of liability. Seamanship-Measure of skill-Necessity for expert evidence.

CHUNG CHI CHEUNG v. REX.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 151

International law-Foreign armed public ship-Crime committed on board Chinese Government vessel in British territorial waters (Hongkong) - Murder of captain by cabin boy- Accused tried and convicted by Hongkong Court - Jurisdiction - Immunities of public ships-Waiver.

CRAIG v. DOVER NAVIGATION COMPANY, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 158

Workmen's compensation - "Arising out of the employment"-Death of seaman from yellow fever-Fever resulting from mosquito bite while on board ship - Vessel in port admittedly a danger zone for fever-Claim by dependant against shipowners - Decision of learned County Court Judge that the infection arose from natural forces; that there was no special exposure to those forces incidental to the seaman's employment; and that therefore the claim failed.

AHLERS v. BROOME & GREEN, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 163

Contract - Agency - Factor - Equitable assignment-Sales of tomatoes by defendants on behalf of foreign growers-Advances made by defendants to growers (J)-Retention by defendants of balance of proceeds of sale after deduction of advances and charges - Advances also made to J by plaintiff - J's fruit crop handed over to plaintiff for shipment-Shipments sent by plaintiff to defendants for sale-Request made by plaintiff (through medium of letter and advice notes) that defendants should pay net proceeds to him-Right of plaintiff to proceeds of sale-Title to sue-Property in fruit-Whether plaintiff a factor and therefore entitled to lien for his advances without notice to defendants-Further contention that plaintiff was equitable assignee of J's right to receive proceeds.

INGRAM, PERKINS & CO., LTD. v. E. WHITEAWAY & CO.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 168

Sale of goods-Breach-Refusal by buyers to take delivery-Sale of Yugo-Slav timber by plaintiffs to defendants-Delivery as required-Part of contract timber not yet shipped-Arrangement made whereby plaintiffs could supply defendants with other timber in lieu of unshipped timber, subject to defendants' right of inspection-Non-contract timber accepted by defendants under arrangement - Further tenders of non-contract timber refused by defendants-Time for performance of contract-Waiver.

GREAT YARMOUTH PORT AND HAVEN COMMISSIONERS v. F. T. EVERARD & SONS, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 171

Ports, Harbours, etc.-Haven and wharfage dues-Statutory powers in port authority to levy dues on vessels entering or leaving haven-List of tolls drawn up by authority-Amounts varying with class of vessel and with service - Defendants' cargo-carrying vessels engaged in towing their sailing vessels in and out of haven-Tolls paid as cargo-carrying vessels-Liability for towage dues-Test to be applied-Special reference to vessels "used for the purpose of towing"-Ambiguity.

BERNHARD BLUMENFELD KOMMANDIT GESELLSCHAFT AUF AKTIEN v. SHEAF STEAM SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 175

Bill of lading-Loss of coal cargo-Ship sunk with all hands off Dogger Bank-Unseaworthiness or perils of the sea-Ship admitted structurally seaworthy on sailing from the Tyne-Allegation by cargo-owners that vessel was unseaworthy by reason of the manner in which her cargo was stowed-Contention that cargo, by reason of bad stowage, shifted during voyage, causing list-Evidence of method of stowage-Reports of weather conditions-Onus of proof of seaworthiness-Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1924, Schedule, Art. IV.

ONESIMUS DOREY & SONS, LTD. v. HEADLEY'S WHARF, LTD., AND WILLIAM ASHBY, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 186

Negligence-Bad berth-Sagging damage to plaintiffs' ship - Vessel, under charter to M, loaded with stone for discharge at first defendants' wharf in London, first defendants having first call upon charterers' London cargoes - First defendants' wharf already occupied-Arrangement made that vessel should part discharge at adjacent wharf belonging to second defendants-Nature of arrangement-Vessel, too long for second defendants' wharf, berthed in position overlapping first defendants' wharf-Liability of defendants-Whether jointly responsible for damage.

THE "UMTALI."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 195

Collision - River - Starboard-hand rule - Vessels approaching point in river-Collision between steamship Corrientes and steamship Umtali in St. Clement's Reach, River Thames, a little below Stone Ness Point, in daylight - Corrientes bound up; Umtali bound down-Ebb tide-Contact between stem of Umtali and port side of Corrientes-Allegation by Corrientes that, the vessels being in a position to pass port to port, the Umtali negligently ported into her - Allegation by Umtali that the Corrientes, proceeding up on the southerly side of mid-channel and having accepted the Umtali's invitation to pass starboard to starboard, suddenly altered course to starboard-Dispute as to position of Corrientes; as to whistle signals given and heard by each vessel; as to place of collision; as to heading of vessels at collision; and as to speed of Umtali-Duty of vessels under by-laws-Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rule 33-Port of London River (Amendment) By-laws, 1934, Rule 4 (a). Port of London River (Amendment) By-laws, 1934, Rule 4 (a)-Purpose of rule. Apportionment of blame-Variation on appeal where Appellate Court accepts findings of trial Judge.

THE "HERANGER."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 204

Collision - River - Starboard-hand rule - Seamanship-Collision between British steamship Diamond and Norwegian motor vessel Heranger in Long Reach, River Thames-Diamond bound up; Heranger bound down-Contact between stem of Heranger and starboard side of Diamond-Diamond sunk, with loss of master and seaman-Diamond, on voyage between wharves just over a mile apart on the south shore, proceeding up on south side - Whether a special circumstance under Rule 33 of the Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934-Duty under by-law-Whether Heranger entitled to expect that Diamond would comply with by-law-Duty of Heranger-Failure to reverse in time-Whether a fault contributing to collision-Onus of proof.

"NORDBORG" (OWNERS) v. C. P. SHERWOOD & CO.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 213

Bill of lading-Freight-Short delivery-Over-delivery - Cargo of redwood shipped under 12 bills of lading-Admitted short delivery under four and over-delivery under seven-Claim by shipowners for balance of freight-Counterclaim by consignees in respect of short delivery-Reply by shipowners that they should be credited with the value of over-deliveries accepted by consignees, which admittedly exceeded value of short deliveries.

MESSERS, LTD. v. MORRISON'S EXPORT COMPANY, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 217

Sale of goods-Rejection-"To be loaded on deck 13"-Construction-Sale of 129 standards of timber to be shipped at British Columbia-69 standards of shipment of 80 standards loaded on deck-Right of buyers to reject-Award of umpire that buyers were not entitled to reject but only to an allowance off contract price-Case stated.

CLIFFSIDE SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD. v. THE DISTILLERS COMPANY, LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 220

Bill of lading-Damage to cargo (maize) by sea water-Shipment in good order and condition-Delivered damaged-Balance of freight withheld by cargo-owners-Counterclaim for damage to cargo-Evidence that greater part of damage was caused by leakage from refrigerator discharge pipe-Shipowners' plea that they were protected by exceptions of perils of the sea and latent defects-Onus of proof-Weather encountered on voyage-Theories propounded by shipowners as to cause of holes found in discharge pipe - "Electrolytic action" or "cavitation"-Proof of latent defect-Seaworthiness of vessel on sailing.

THE "BRABANT."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 225

Negligent navigation-Anchored vessel-Collision between Russian motor vessel Felix Dzerjinsky and craft in barge roads in Woolwich Reach, River Thames-Allegation by Russian vessel, bound up river, that Dutch motor vessel Brabant, lying at anchor, came ahead and forced her (the Russian vessel) to take sudden port helm action, and that the subsequent collision was a direct consequence-Contention by Brabant that the Russian vessel passed too close at speed and caused the Brabant to drag her anchor and move across the river - Onus of proof - Look-out - Brabant found alone to blame by Sir Boyd Merriman, P.

-Appeal-Evidence of bottom damage to Russian vessel given at trial-When and where sustained-Onus of proof.

THE "DUX."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 231

Negligent navigation-Grounding of plaintiffs' lighter Seabird in River Trent-Seabird, in tow of tug Ferryman, bound upriver-Defendant' keel Dux working her way up river along the east bank by means of boathooks-Dux blown away from bank, drifting across course of tow-Grounding of Seabird in consequence of helm action taken to avoid Dux - Total loss of Seabird and cargo-Duty of Dux under Humber Rules-"21. No vessel shall be allowed to drift otherwise than under control or to drift athwart or abreast"-Whether Dux acted in breach of Rule 21.

THE "BOLTENHOF."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 235

Collision - Dragging collision - Collision between plaintiffs' steamship Marklyn and defendants' steamship Boltenhof off Melilla - Both vessels originally anchored about two miles from each other - Contact between starboard quarter of Marklyn and port bow of Boltenhof, both vessels afterwards driving ashore and coming into further contact with each other-Cause of collision - Whether Marklyn dragged down upon Boltenhof or whether Boltenhof steamed up to Marklyn-Very severe weather-Dragging into collision as prima facie evidence of negligence.

T. D. BAILEY, SON & CO. v. ROSS T. SMYTH & CO., LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 242

Sale of goods (c.i.f.)-Rejection of documents by buyers-London Corn Trade Association Contract, No. 28-Sale of 15,000 units [of 480 lb.] of No. 2 Yellow American Corn-Seller "has the option of shipping a further 3 per cent. more or less on contract quantity, excess or deficiency over the above 2 per cent. to be settled at the c.f. & i. price on date of bill of lading, and on the quantity thereof"-"Separate documents for each 1000 units and each 1000 units to be considered a separate contract"-Notice of appropriation given of "about 15,444 qrs."-Provisional invoice sent by sellers stating that there were 15 bills of lading each for 1000 units and one bill of lading for 444 units-Rejection of provisional invoice by buyers as not being in accordance with contract-Amended provisional invoice sent by sellers stating that there were 15 bills of lading each for 1000 units, also rejected by buyers-Arbitration-Award of Appeal Committee (reversing award of umpire) that buyers were entitled to reject-Case stated.

LOVELL v. WILLIAMS.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 249

Practice-Motor insurance-Stay of action-Frivolous and vexatious proceedings-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in collision with defendant's motor cycle - Proceedings commenced by plaintiff in County Court-Settlement of action-Acceptance by plaintiff of sum "in full satisfaction and discharge of all claims including any future claims for injuries sustained by me by reason of the alleged negligent driving of the [defendant]"-Subsequent discovery upon further medical examination that injuries sustained were much more serious than had been supposed at the time of the settlement-Action commenced by plaintiff in High Court-Summons issued by defendant that further proceedings be stayed on the ground that they were frivolous and vexatious and an abuse of the process of the Court, dismissed by Master but upheld on appeal by learned Judge-Appeal by plaintiff against order.

KING LINE, LTD. v. MOXEY, SAVON & CO., LTD.

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 252

Charter-party-Shifting berth-Charter of vessel to proceed to Barry "and there load, always afloat, in the customary manner, from the charterers, in such dock as way be ordered by them on or before arrival in Barry Roads, a full and complete cargo of nominated coal . . ."-Vessel stemmed to commence loading at 20-ton hoist-No such hoist immediately available-Election by charterers to commence loading at ordinary berth-Vessel shifted to 20-ton hoist when available, involving expenditure of £19 odd by shipowners-Claim to recover from charterers-Decision of learned County Court Judge that charterers had no case to answer.

THE "ABODI MENDI."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 254

Admiralty practice-Ship-Action in rem for possession brought by plaintiffs, the Spanish Republican Government-Arrest by Admiralty Marshal-Unconditional appearance entered by owners and captain-Conditional appearance entered by Nationalist Government of Spain-Notice of discontinuance of action given by plaintiffs-Consent to release signed by owners-Summons for release issued by plaintiffs-Captain prevented from returning on board-Consent to release withdrawn by owners-Whether consent by owners necessary as plaintiffs had discontinued their action-Summons by owners for order for reinstatement of master-Allegation by plaintiffs that captain had been dismissed prior to issue of writ and had never acted as captain since-Duty of Admiralty Marshal - Rules of the Supreme Court, Order 5, r. 16, Order 29, Order 52, r. 23.

THE "ULV."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 259

Practice - Charter-party - Arbitration clause-Claims by charterers of foreign vessel in respect of matters arising under charter-party-Issue of writ-Vessel arrested-Bail given by owners-Motion by owners to set aside writ and that subsequent proceedings be stayed-Order of learned Judge that subsequent proceedings be stayed.

WESTWICK STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD. v. PELAW MAIN COLLIERIES, LTD. (THE "ANDELLE").

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 260

Negligence-Bad berth - Propeller damage sustained by plaintiffs' steamship in leaving defendants' berth in River Tyne -Allegation that damage was due to an abnormal obstruction in berth-Duty of berth-owners to ascertain that berth is reasonably safe or to warn user that condition of berth is unknown - Evidence of formation of berth - Surveyor's reports-Pilot's knowledge of ridge in berth.

THE "HURUNUI."

(1938) 62 Ll.L.Rep. 266

Collision-Crossing courses-Duty of stand-on vessel under Collision Regulations, Art. 21n-Collision between steam drifter Reclaim and steamship Hurunui off Lowestoft-Vessels on crossing courses, the Reclaim being the give-way vessel-Reclaim admittedly to blame for failing to give way-Reclaim sunk with loos of nine of crew of ten-Claim by dependants of deceased engineer against Hurunui-Duty of Hurunui, when she found herself so close to the Reclaim that collision could not be avoided by the action of the Reclaim alone, to take such action as would best aid to avert collision-Whether Hurunui failed in that duty.

Lloyd's Law Reports