i-law.com

ROSE v. FORD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 1

Damages-Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1934-Motor accident -Collision on Aug. 4, 1934, between motor cycle combination (in which R was passenger) and defendant's motor car - R seriously injured - Leg amputated on Aug. 6-Death of R on Aug. 8-Claim by administrator for damages (a) under Fatal Accidents Acts as partial dependant of deceased; (b) under Act of 1934 for the benefit of R's estate (i) in respect of pain and suffering; (ii) in respect of the loss of a leg; (iii) in respect of the shortening of R's reasonable expectation of life (Flint v. Lovell, [1935] 1 K.B. 354)- Sect. 1 (2): "Where a cause of action survives as aforesaid for the benefit of the estate of a deceased person, the damages recoverable for the benefit of the estate of that person: . . . (c) where the death of that person has been caused by the act or omission which gives rise to the cause of action, shall be calculated without reference to any loss or gain to his estate consequent on his death, except that a sum in respect of funeral expenses may be included"-Assessment of damages by Humphreys, J., under head (a): £300; under (b) (i) and (ii): £500-Damages refused under head (b) (iii)-Appeal by defendant against assessment of damages under heads (b) (i) and (ii)- Cross-appeal by plaintiff against refusal of learned Judge to award damages in respect of the "shortening of the expectation of life."

EDMONDSON v. SIR R. ROPNER & CO., LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 9

Master and servant-Shipmaster-Dismissal without notice-Claim by plaintiff for wages in lieu of notice or for damages for wrongful dismissal- Plaintiff intermittently engaged as master by defendants-Plaintiff given command of defendants' steamship A, defendants' letter of appointment containing the following passage: "We have decided to offer you the command of the Ainderby, and in thus being reinstated we wish you to clearly understand that your position on the steamer will be most carefully watched, and unless complete satisfaction is given we shall have no hesitation in relieving you of this command, with no further hope of employment with us" - Plaintiff dismissed without notice at end of voyage-Judgment of learned County Court Judge that no such misconduct was proved as would justify summary dismissal, but that the defendants' dissatisfaction was genuine and not capricious and that their action in dismissing the plaintiff without notice was justified under the terms of their letter.

WILLIAM CORY & SON, LTD. v. DORMAN, LONG & CO., LTD. (THE "TURK.")

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 13

Limitation of liability-Collision between barge and cofferdam - Collapse of cofferdam - Negligence of barge - Contention by plaintiffs that they were bailees for hire or charterers by demise of the barge, who had contracted to take over the sole charge and management thereof and were responsible for its navigation, manning and equipment-Barge in ownership of lighterage company, subsidiary to plaintiff company - Allegation by plaintiffs that they had entered into a verbal agreement with the lighterage company whereby all the barges owned by the lighterage company were to be handed over to the plaintiffs and operated by them in consideration (inter alia) of the trading results of lighterage, &c., accruing to the lighterage company-Merchant Shipping Act, 1906, Sect. 71-Merchant Shipping Act, 1921, Sect. 1 (2).

GREAVES v. DRYSDALE.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 16

Burglary insurance-Loss-Claim under policy-Large quantity of jewellery and cash stolen from pawnbroker's premises during week-end-"No claim to attach to this policy when the loss is occasioned by members of the assured's staff or household or inmates of the above-mentioned premises"- Premises occupied by members of assured's staff-Onus of proof of loss -Defence that theft was "occasioned by members of the assured's staff or household or inmates" of the premises.

LUIS DE RIDDER, LTDA., S.A.C. v. NIVOSE SOCIETA DI NAVIGAZIONE.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 21

Arbitration - Arbitrator-Appointment- Dispute between shipowners and charterers as to freight payable- Clause in charter-party providing for disputes to be referred to arbitration within three months of discharge- Charterers out of time-Application for extension-Arbitration Act, 1934, Sect. 16 (6).

THE "HANS M'RSK."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 22

Collision between steamships Kashgar and Hans M‘rsk in English Channel in fog-Vessels on opposite courses-Claim by owners of cargo on board Kashgar against owners of Hans M‘rsk- -Speed-Helm action-Look-out.

BRITISH OIL & CAKE MILLS, LTD. v. MOOR LINE, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 29

Bill of lading-Discharging expenses (bulk cottonseed at Southampton)-Discharging processes: (1) trimming; (2) bushelling and bagging; (3) hoisting to scale; (4) weighing; (5) discharging overside either into lighter or truck- Clause in bill of lading providing that "The owner and consignee of the goods and shipowner mutually agree to be bound by all of the above stipulations, exceptions and conditions, notwithstanding any custom of the ports of loading and discharging to the contrary" -Dispute between consignees and shipowners as to method of discharge -Discharge effected by Southern Railway (dock authority)-Intimation given to master by S.R. that they objected to delivery in bulk at ship's rail and would only allow delivery in accordance with the method which applied to all classes of grain and seed cargoes, viz., the filling of the seed into bags and the raising of the bags by means of the ship's tackle on to the deck and there weighing the contents of the bags in order to ascertain the outturn-Acquiescence by master- Whether cost of bushelling and bagging fell upon the consignees or the shipowners -Detention of barges, &c., pending dispute-Alleged custom for shipowners to pay for bushelling and bagging.

THE "LOGIC."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 35

Collision - Damages - Reference - Collision between steamships Kingsborough and Logic on Dec. 20, 1933, in Crosby Channel, River Mersey-Kingsborough aground at time of collision-Apportionment of blame: Kingsborough one-third, Logic, two-thirds-Kingsborough docked at Liverpool on Dec. 22 to unload cargo-Subsequently dry-docked at Birkenhead on Jan. 4, 1934, for survey-Extensive grounding damage occupying 22 days for repair- Propeller damaged by collision necessitating replacement-Contention by Logic that diver's report upon propeller damage should have been obtained upon docking at Liverpool for discharge, which would have permitted order being sent to Glasgow for new propeller immediately upon drydocking at Birkenhead-Kingsborough fitted with temporary spare propeller and fixed for charter on Feb. 23 (cancelling date Feb. 28)-Right of Kingsborough to expenses incurred in drydocking at Cardiff, subsequent to charter, to fit new propeller-Evidence that even if survey of propeller had been held at Liverpool it would still have been impossible immediately to place the order in Glasgow for a new propeller owing to the intervention of customary week's holiday, and that it was doubtful whether manufacture would have been completed in time to carry out charter- Further claim for four days' lost time in fitting propeller at Cardiff.

ARCOS, LTD. v. LONDON & NORTHERN TRADING COMPANY, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 38

Sale of goods-Damages-Rejection by buyers (defendants)-Sale by plaintiffs of "entire production of pitprops available for 1931 shipment"-Various lengths and top diameters-Preliminary questions previously put to Court: (1) Whether the defendants were bound to accept timber felled earlier than the winter of 1930/31; (2) whether the defendants were entitled to receive in each shipment or parcel of a particular length props ranging fairly between specified extreme diameters of tops for such lengths so that by such range there should be approximately 50 per cent. thick and 50 per cent. thin top diameters-Decision of House of Lords as to (1) that the plaintiffs were entitled to ship and that the defendants (subject to their right of rejection on account of quality or condition) were bound to accept overlying timber; as to (2) that the defendants were entitled in each parcel of any particular length of props to receive a fair or reasonable range of top diameters not involving any apportionment by percentages-Reference to Special Referee to report upon question of damages-Reports upon shipped and unshipped goods-Shipped goods which had been rejected sold in open market by sellers-Balance of loss as compared with contract price amounting to £46,625-Right of rejection-"When goods of more than one group are loaded in same steamer each group to be loaded on separate bill of lading"-Pitprops of different lengths included in same bill of lading-Unshipped goods after being stored in Russia until 1932 sold at profit of £67,083-Whether buyers should be credited with that profit- Occupation of storing ground pre-renting use for other pitprops of which there was an unlimited supply and which, sellers alleged, could have been sold at a profit-Cost of storing, 440,000 roubles-Rate of exchange to be applied-"Commercial" or "official" -Adoption by Referee of official rate of 7.42 roubles to the £, amounting with interest to £65,943.

GREIN v. IMPERIAL AIRWAYS, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 51

Aeroplane - Accident - Negligence - Death of pilot, navigator and passengers - Claim under Fatal Accidents Acts against defendant aeroplane company by dependants of deceased passenger-Aeroplane on journey from Brussels to London in foggy weather-Collision with radio mast at Ruysselede-Whether accident due to negligence of defendants or their servants-Evidence as to equipment of aeroplane-Competence of pilot and navigator-Deceased passenger carried under return ticket from London to Brussels and back-Ticket incorporating "General Conditions of Carriage of Passengers and Baggage" -Whether passenger by reason of these conditions renounced for himself or his representatives all claims for compensation; and whether, assuming the plaintiff's right to recovery, the sum recoverable was limited to 125,000 francs-Applicability of Carriage by Air Act, 1932 - "International carriage" - General Conditions of Carriage of Passengers and Baggage (International Air Traffic Association), Art. 18, pars. 1, 2, 3, 5, Art. 19, pars. 1, 2-Carriage by Air Act, 1932, Schedule I, Arts. 1 (2), 17, 20, 22, Schedule II.

LONDON GUARANTEE & ACCIDENT COMPANY, LTD., AND OTHERS v. NORTHWESTERN UTILITIES, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 67

Negligence - Public utility company (Canada)-Company empowered to distribute natural gas within the City of Edmonton, Alberta-Breaking of welded joint in main-Escape of gas followed by fire causing extensive damage to property - Claim by property owners against company- Contention by company that breaking of joint was solely due to the negligent manner in which the City authorities had carried out certain excavations in the vicinity of the company's mains, which had left those mains without adequate support-Rylands v. Fletcher, L.R. 3 H.L. 330-Duty of company acting under statutory powers - Whether property owners had a common interest with the company in maintaining the potentially dangerous installation or had consented to the danger-"(13) The company shall locate and construct its gas . . . works . . . and all apparatus and appurtenances thereto . . . so as not to endanger the public health or safety"-Water, Gas, Electric and Telephone Companies Act, R.S. Alberta, 1922, (as amended in 1924), Sects. 11, 13.

THE "NAPIER STAR."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 75

Collision between steamships Laurentic and Napier Star off the Isle of Man in fog-Vessels on opposite courses- Contention by Laurentic that she was navigating in clear weather until two minutes before the collision-Speeds- Whistle signals-Helm action-Collision Regulations, Arts. 15, 16-Maritime Conventions Act, 1911, Sect. 1 (1).

LISTER v. WARNE; LISTER v. ABSON.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 96

DANNEBERG v. WHITE SEA TIMBER TRUST, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 99

Charter-party-Ice clause-Claim by shipowners against charterers for damages for detention-Delay in reaching and leaving loading port (Leningrad)- "(1) In the event of the port of loading being inaccessible by reason of ice, or in case ice sets in after vessel's arrival at port of loading, the charterers undertake to arrange for the provision by the port authorities of icebreaker assistance if required by the captain, free of expense to the steamer, the steamer complying with official instructions and rules issued by the authorities concerning icebreaker assistance. . . (2) Icebreaker assistance to be rendered free of expense to the steamer within 48 hours of receipt by the captain of port (at loading port) of master's or owner's notification of arrival at the edge of ice, or when leaving port 48 hours after notification by the master of readiness to leave. (3) Time lost by the vessel in waiting for icebreaker assistance at the edge of ice and when leaving the loading port in excess of the time provided for in Clause (2) to count as demurrage and/or detention and to be paid by charterers at the rate of £20 per day or pro rata from which time days saved in loading and/or discharging shall be deducted. (4) The charterers shall not be responsible for any loss of time during passage through the ice and/or any loss or damage caused to the steamer by ice or for any detention on passage through ice"-Construction- Obligation of charterers-"Undertake to arrange for the provision by the port authorities of icebreaker assistance" -Effect of sub-clause (4).

THE "LUIMNEACH."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 114

Collision - Damages - Non-profit-earning vessel - Reference - Collision between H.M.S. Whirlwind and steamship Luimneach-Replacement of Whirlwind by vessel in reserve - Claim by Admiralty for "(7) Damages for the withdrawal of H.M.S. Whirlwind from service for 28 days, or in the alternative claim for fitting out and use of H.M.S. Wessex taken from reserve for corresponding period" - Amount claimed £2500-£500 allowed by Registrar in respect of cost of transfer from and into reserve-Motion in objection by Admiralty - Contention that sum allowed was in fact an item of special damage and that the learned Registrar had ignored the claim for general damages based on interest on capital value, depreciation and maintenance -The Chekiang, [1926] A.C. 637; 25 Ll.L.Rep. 173, and the Susquehanna, [1926] A.C. 655; 25 Ll.L.Rep. 205, discussed.

ROBEY v. VLADINIER.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 121

Merchant Shipping Act, 1894-Stowaway- Information laid before magistrate against foreigner that "On Oct. 14, 1934, at Oran, [he] unlawfully secreted himself and proceeded to sea on board the British steamer Rio Azul without the consent of the owners, master or other person entitled to give such consent"-Jurisdiction of magistrate to try offence-"Secretes himself and goes to sea in a ship" without the consent of the owners, &c.-Decision of magistrate that he had no jurisdiction - Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, Sects. 237 (1), 684, 686.

TABOR, LTD. v. WEST, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 124

Charter-party-Breach-Delay on voyage -Defendants' barge chartered by plaintiffs to carry cargo of oysters from Victoria Dock, London, to West Hoo Creek, River Medway-Claim by plaintiffs for damages - Contention that voyage was not performed with reasonable dispatch; that there was such unreasonable delay amounting to frustration of the contract of carriage; alternatively, that there was delay amounting to a breach of contract- Alleged negligence of master-Evidence of voyage; of tides; and of visibility -Counterclaim by defendants for freight unpaid.

"TILLY L. M. RUSS" (OWNER) v. WHITE SEA TIMBER TRUST, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 129

Charter-party - Freight - Carriage of timber from Leningrad to Antwerp- Basis on which timber should be measured for purpose of ascertaining final outturn-Customary allowances- Consultative case stated for opinion of Court under Sect. 19 of Arbitration Act, 1889-Decision of Court that timber should be measured with any customary deductions or allowances.

"YERO CARRAS" (OWNERS) v. LONDON & SCOTTISH ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 131

Marine insurance-Freight-Constructive total loss-Vessel chartered to proceed to Valparaiso to load cargo for Europe-Insurance of charter freight -Institute Voyage Clauses (Freight): "(4) In the event of the total loss, whether absolute or constructive, of the vessel, the amount underwritten by this policy shall be paid in full, whether the vessel be fully or only partly loaded or in ballast, chartered or unchartered. (5) In ascertaining whether the vessel is a constructive total loss the insured value in the policies on ship shall be taken as the repaired value and nothing in respect of the damaged or break-up value of the vessel or wreck shall be taken into account. (7) Warranted free from any claim consequent on loss of time whether arising from a peril of the sea or otherwise" -Stranding of vessel in Strait of Magellan on voyage to Valparaiso- Salvage agreement entered into by master with local salvors on Lloyd's form-Agreement to pay minimum remuneration of £6000 with provision for further award to be arbitrated upon-Notice of abandonment given to underwriters on ship-Subsequent compromise, underwriters on ship paying 100 per cent. and proportion of sue and labour charges, the shipowners retaining the ship and remaining responsible for all liabilities attaching thereto-Claim by shipowners under freight policy-Whether total or constructive total loss of freight-Cost of repairs to ship and of discharging salvors' lien-Port of repair-Expenses allowable - Sue and labour charges - Insured value of ship: £30,000 - Actual value: undamaged, £13,000; damaged, £2200-Marine Insurance Act, 1906, Sects. 60, 91 (2).

THE "MEANTICUT."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 145

Collision between barge Aster, in tow of tug Queen Philippa, and American steamship Meanticut, in tow of tugs, in Limehouse Reach, River Thames- Aster sunk - Queen Philippa bound down river; Meanticut bound up river -Meanticut, rounding bend in river under starboard wheel, running off her way preparatory to entering Surrey Commercial Docks - Dispute as to manoeuvres of Queen Philippa-Vessels green to green on sighting one another -Starboard helm signals blown by Meanticut and her tugs-Failure of Meanticut to respond to her helm action.

MARCELINO GONZALEZ Y COMPANIA S. EN C. v. JAMES NOURSE, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 151

WILLMOTT v. GENERAL ACCIDENT FIRE & LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 156

Marine insurance-Sinking of plaintiff's motor boat during gale - Claim - Vessel moored off Anchor Head, Weston-super-Mare-Defences: unseaworthiness; non-disclosure as to habitual mooring place; misstatement as to value-"If this policy . . . has been obtained through the omission to state any material fact, or through any misstatement by the assured . . . this policy is null and void."

TATEM STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY, LTD. v. ANGLO-CANADIAN SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 161

Charter-party - Discharging expenses - Charterers to "pay cost of stevedoring at ports of . . . discharging"- Steamer to "furnish winches, derricks, gins and falls, and usual gear for working cargo . . ."-"Shore winch-man and tallying at discharging port to be for charterers' account"-Damage to ship's gear owing to heavy weather (an excepted peril) during voyage- Charterers' agents notified by ship's agents that in view of damage sustained it would be necessary to arrange for discharge at crane berth-Contention by charterers that notification constituted instructions on shipowners' behalf and that shipowners were responsible for additional expense due to unusual method of discharge- Arbitration-Award that expenses were the charterers' liability-Case stated- Contention by charterers before his Lordship that shipowners should have repaired gear on arrival to carry out their obligation under the charter-party -Point not taken before umpire.

THE "URANIENBORG."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 165

Negligence - Towage - Tugs Kenia and Tanga engaged to tow steamship Uranienborg to Swanscombe Buoys, River Thames-Uranienborg discharging at Bellamy's Wharf-Tanga tied up at buoy 300 ft. away from Uranienborg-Subsequent arrival of Kenia-Approach at excessive speed, Kenia colliding with Uranienborg, causing extensive damage - Uranienborg not yet ready for towing -Tugs engaged under United Kingdom Standard Towage Conditions - Clause 1: "For the purpose of these conditions the phrase 'whilst towing' shall be deemed to cover the period commencing when the tug is in a position to receive orders direct from the hirer's vessel to pick up ropes or lines or when the tow rope has been passed to or by the tug, whichever is the sooner, and ending when the final orders from the hirer's vessel to cast off ropes or lines have been carried out, or the tow rope has been finally slipped and the tug is safely clear of the vessel, whichever is the later . . ." - Whether collision occurred in circumstances covered by the conditions-Meaning of "position."

THE "TOWER BRIDGE."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 171

Salvage-Services rendered by British steamship Newfoundland to British steamship Tower Bridge off Labrador coast-Tower Bridge navigating in icefield in a southerly direction-Vessel badly damaged by ice and in a dangerous position-S O S sent out- Return by Newfoundland, the only vessel within reasonable distance, through icefield to Tower Bridge-Advice given by wireless to Tower Bridge to steer due east and follow Newfoundland out of icefield-Advice acted upon by Tower Bridge-Vessels never in actual contact -Whether service constituted a salvage service.

BALKANS AND NEAR EAST SHIPPING AGENCY v. UNITED SHIPPING AGENCIES, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 180

Charter-party-Dead freight-"Charterers have the option of loading full and complete cargo . . . on deadweight basis, in which case charterers shall pay freight at the rate of as above per ton of 2240 lb., calculated on steamer's deadweight cargo capacity, as per builder's plan and displacement scale . . . after allowance has been made for loading in fresh water, for bunker coals for the present voyage, and also for any weight on board the steamer not reckoned in builder's plan"-Liberty to call at any intermediate port or ports for any purpose -"Stevedoring . . . to be done by charterers . . . and paid for by the ship on shipment of cargo at 2s. 6d. per unit on the total quantity of cargo shipped including dead freight . . ." -Deadweight capacity 5324 tons - Freight paid on 4910 tons-Dispute as to allowances in respect of bunker coals, boiler water, rust and dirt, shifting boards, stores and provisions, and fresh water-Whether owners had right to call at intermediate ports for bunker coals, and whether that right was limited to a specific number of ports- Amount due to charterers in respect of stevedoring-Arbitration-Case stated -Right of charterers to raise point not raised at arbitration as to water in ballast tanks.

IN RE ANCHOR LINE (HENDERSON BROTHERS), LTD. (APPLICATION BY OCEAN STEAMSHIP CO., LTD.).

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 185

Sale of goods-Passing of property-Sale of crane-Terms of contract: "(1) We agree that you take over the crane . . . for a deferred purchase price of £4000. (2) Until the completion of the purchase you agree to pay us for interest and depreciation at the rates of £350 per annum for the first two years after taking over, £450 per annum for the second two years and £400 per annum thereafter. (3) Of these sums a proportion amounting to £240 per annum, or 6 per cent. of the purchase price of the crane, is to be regarded as depreciation, and the total of the annual payments for depreciation is to be deducted from the above-mentioned amount of £4000 in order to arrive at the balance actually to be paid by you on completion of the purchase whenever that may take place. In the meantime you will have entire charge of and responsibility for the crane in every respect. We suggest that the payments be made quarterly, and that the date for your taking over the crane be fixed as from Sept. 5, 1931"-Sale of Goods Act, 1893, Sect. 18, Rule 1.

VIGERS BROS. v. ALLEN.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 187

Arbitration - Arbitrator - Negligence - Defendant appointed as arbitrator by plaintiffs, buyers of timber, in their arbitration with sellers-Instructions to defendant: "Please give notice to the sellers' arbitrator that we require a case stated if we do not get the amount we claim"-Intimation given in good faith by defendant at arbitration that he did not desire the award to be stated in form of special case-Claim by plaintiffs for damages-Defence: that apart from fraud or corruption, no such action would lie, since once defendant was appointed arbitrator he was thereafter invested with quasi-judicial authority; that even if defendant had ceased to be an arbitrator, he was not negligent; and that in any event there was no proof of damage- Position of arbitrator considered.

MOORE v. CUNARD STEAM SHIP COMPANY, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 193

THE "CARITA II."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 197

THE "TUBAL CAIN."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 203

Collision between motor fishing vessel Portland and trawler Tubal Cain in No. 1 fish dock, Grimsby-Portland, having been given permission to move into No. 2 fish dock, moving astern from pontoon in No. 1 fish dock-Tubal Cain navigating through lock into No. 1 fish dock also bound for No. 2 fish dock-Portland exhibiting a stern light only-Look-outs-Whistle signals -Allegation that Tubal Cain was proceeding at excessive speed.

GODDARD v. RAAHE O/Y OSAKEYHTIO.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 208

Sale of goods-Rejection-Two contracts for sale of timber-First contract for sale of 85 standards of unsorted redwood and 33 standards of fifth quality and/or discoloured redwood-Second contract for sale of 75 standards of 212 in. by 312 in. redwood and 20/25 standards of fifth quality and/or discoloured redwood-Variations in quantities and qualities delivered- Wood required by buyer for cottage joinery purposes-Whether buyer made known to sellers the particular purpose for which goods were required so as to show that the buyer relied on the sellers' skill and judgment-Right of rejection-Whether affected by alleged custom of trade in such circumstances not to reject but to make allowance- "The buyers shall not reject the goods herein specified but shall accept or pay for them in terms of contract against shipping documents"-"Each item of this contract to be considered a separate interest"-Arbitration-Case stated- Findings of umpire as to first contract, (a) that this contract was not subject to condition as to fitness for particular purpose; (b) that the total quantity of timber to be shipped thereunder was 118 standards and that the total quantity in fact shipped was 125 standards; (c) that having regard to the contract terms and the acceptance of a credit note for £16 there was no such variation between the quantity of timber contracted for and the quantity in fact shipped as to give the buyer a right to reject; as to second contract, that the total quantity of timber to be shipped thereunder was from 95 to 100 standards and that the total quantity in fact shipped was 11512 standards; as to both contracts, that the goods delivered thereunder were substantially of the shipper's usual bracking and in so far as there was any variation therefrom such variation was by the custom of the timber trade the subject of an allowance and did not constitute a ground for rejection by the buyer-Questions for the opinion of the Court: As to second contract, (1) Was there a condition express or implied that the unsorted redwood to be delivered thereunder should be fit for cottage joinery purposes? If not, (2) Were the goods supplied under this contract fit for cottage joinery purposes?-As to both contracts, (3) Did the goods so differ from the specification as to give the buyer the right to reject? (4) Did the goods consist of those which the sellers had contracted to sell mixed with goods of a different description not included in the contract? (5) Is each of the contracts to be treated as an indivisible whole or are the various items of unsorted redwood and fifths included in the shipment under each contract to be taken as separate or divisible items?-Sale of Goods Act, 1893, Sects. 14 (1), 30 (3).

SAXTON v. NICHOLSON & CO., LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 221

Sale of goods-Breach-Non-delivery- Sale of wood goods hereinafter specified "for shipment during the coming season"-"About 1000 logs cut into boules . . . and subject to sample quantity as follows for November shipment: -'About 25 logs hewn, all cut to 118 in. thickness at 3s. 3d., about 25 logs round unbarked, all cut to 1 in. thickness at 3s. 3d.' per cubic ft. . . ." -40 sample logs delivered of good quality but not cut in accordance with stipulated thicknesses - Non-delivery of remainder-Claim by buyer for damages - Case stated - Findings of umpire that buyer had right to reject but that he accepted sample delivery and was entitled to damages; that buyer made repeated requests for delivery of remainder and that, the sellers failing to deliver, the buyer was entitled to further damages-Whether sellers committed breaches of contract as to the sample delivery and as to the remainder-Contention by sellers that no binding agreement was entered into as regards the remainder.

TRICKETT v. QUEENSLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., AND OTHERS.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 225

Motor insurance - Exceptions clause - Accident involving death of driver -Claim by appellant assignee under policy - Contention by respondent insurance company that they were exempted from liability by reason of following clause: "No liability shall attach to the company under this policy in respect of any loss, damage, or liability occurring or any personal accident to the insured occurring: (1) While any motor vehicle in connection with which indemnity is granted under this policy is: (e) Being driven in a damaged or unsafe condition"- Insured car without lights at time of accident-Whether knowledge of driver as to unsafe condition was essential in order that insurers might escape liability - Ambiguity - Warranty of roadworthiness - Whether continuing throughout journey.

THE "REGEM."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 230

Collision between sailing barge Violet and motor vessel Regem in River Orwell- Violet bound down; Regem bound up river-Violet proceeding down close to buoys on east side - Sudden starboarding by Violet to avoid buoy at bend in river followed by port helm action to regain her down-river course -Starboarding by Regem-Duty of Regem to keep out of the way.

THE "CLACTON QUEEN."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 234

Collision between auxiliary sailing yacht Onda and paddle steamer Clacton Queen outside Harwich Harbour-Both vessels outward bound proceeding on similar courses, with the Clacton Queen the overtaking vessel-Duty of Clacton Queen to keep out of the way-Dispute as to wind and as to position of vessels at time of collision-Allegation by Clacton Queen that Onda starboarded across the head of the Clacton Queen -Look-out - Whether Onda failed in her duty under note to Art. 21-Porting by Onda at time of collision.

THE "ETHEL RADCLIFFE."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 239

Towage-Damage to tug-Claim by tug to be indemnified by vessel in tow - Tugs Standard Rose and Eagle engaged to tow defendants' steamship Ethel Radcliffe from Mountstuart Dry Dock to Queen Alexandra Dock, Cardiff- Alleged collision in Cardiff entrance channel between tugs following breaking of Eagle's tow rope-Damage to Standard Rose on both bows - Standard Rose engaged under United Kingdom Standard Towage Conditions, providing that "the tugowner shall not, whilst towing, bear or be liable for damage of any description done . . . to the tug . . . arising from any cause, including negligence at any time of the tugowner's servants or agents . . . and the hirer shall pay for all loss or damage . . . and shall also indemnify the tugowner against all consequence thereof . . ."-Contentions by owners of Ethel Radcliffe that no such collision occurred; if it did, that the damage complained of did not arise therefrom.

TIBBALS v. PORT OF LONDON AUTHORITY.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 245

Master and servant-Superannuation- Basis of assessment - War Bonus - Rafter on permanent staff of Surrey Commercial Dock Company-Pension scheme providing (inter alia) that "for the purpose of computing the superannuation allowance in accordance with the prescribed scale the salary or wages of the officer shall . . . be deemed to be at the rate of the actual yearly salary or wages paid to him at the time of his superannuation or retirement exclusive of any gratuities allowances, for house or other additions" - Undertakings of dock companies (including Surrey Commercial Dock Company) taken over by and vested in Port of London Authority by virtue of Port of London Act, 1908-Contention by plaintiff that war bonus was "salary or wages" within the meaning of scheme - Ejusdem generis rule-Whether Act of 1908 gave scheme statutory force making it impossible for plaintiff to contract out of his rights under scheme and whether plaintiff in fact agreed that war bonus should not be taken into account-Rights prior to and subsequent to notice given by Port of London Authority to plaintiff that bonus not to count for pension-No deduction made from war bonus in respect of superannuation.

ANGLO-SOVIET SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD. v. "BELDIS." (APPEAL OF LAMBERT BROS., LTD., INTERVENERS).

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 255

Practice-Admiralty jurisdiction-County Court-Proceedings in rem-Action brought in County Court by plaintiffs against defendants for money due to plaintiffs under an award in an arbitration held by virtue of a clause in a charter-party concerning defendants' steamship Belfri-Arrest of steamship Beldis, also belonging to defendants, ad fundandam jurisdictionem-Judgment entered against defendants in default of appearance-Intervention by Lambert Bros. as mortgagees of Beldis-Issue submitted to Court by agreement between plaintiffs and interveners: "Whether the plaintiffs' action in rem against the s.s. Beldis is maintainable in view of the fact that the plaintiffs' claim in this action arose out of a charter-party of the s.s. Belfri being a ship belonging to the same owners"-Decision of learned County Court Judge, following dictum of C.A. in the Heinrich Bjorn, 10 P.D. 44, that an action in rem was maintainable -County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Acts, 1868 and 1869- "Any claim arising out of any agreement made in relation to the use or hire of any ship."

THE "HJORTHOLM."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 278

Collision between British motor vessel Clan Macdougall and Danish steamship Hjortholm in Swansea entrance channel -Clan Macdougall, having left King's Dock and crossed the channel, proceeding down, with tug assistance, on west side; Hjortholm bound up channel to South Dock-Porting by Hjortholm across course of Clan Macdougall, owing to mistaken impression that vessels leaving King's Dock proceeded down on wrong side- Seamanship-Knowledge of pilot in charge of Clan Macdougall, before leaving dock, that Hjortholm was coming up channel-Whether Clan Macdougall should have waited until Hjortholm had passed all clear before leaving dock-Impracticability of Clan Macdougall stopping after leaving dock owing to state of tide-Collision Regulations, Art. 25.

THE "NJEGOS."

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 286

Bill of lading-Conflict of laws-Law of flag-Claim by plaintiffs, Norwegian and Danish indorsees of bills of lading, against owners of Yugoslav steamship Njegos in respect of short delivery of maize and pollards, shipped in vessel from River Plate to Norway and Denmark-Fire on board -Allegation of unseaworthiness - Contention by defendants that they were protected by charter-party exceptions clause incorporated by reference into bills of lading-"All the terms, conditions and exceptions of . . . charter-party, including the negligence clause [Clause 29], are incorporated herewith" - Amended defence that bill of lading contract governed by law of flag-Charter-party made in England in standard English form and in English language and entered into between English company, as agents for defendants, and the English branch of French company, as agents for Argentine shippers-Bills of lading in common English form adopted for particular trade-Whether bills of lading governed by English law or law of flag tried as preliminary issue- Whether terms of incorporation included English arbitration clause in charter-party-Intention of parties -Business efficacy - Necessary presumption -"29. The steamer shall not be liable for loss or damage occasioned by . . . perils of the sea . . . fire from any cause or wheresoever occurring . . . or any latent defects in . . . appurtenances . . . even when occasioned by the negligence, default or error of judgment of the . . . master, mariners or other servants of the shipowners or persons for whom they may be responsible (not resulting, however, in any case from want of due diligence by the owners of the steamer, or by the ship's husband or manager). . . ."

MACCOLL v. VICKERS-ARMSTRONGS, LTD.

(1935) 53 Ll L Rep 299

Shipbuilding Regulations, 1931 - Non-compliance -Information laid against defendants under Factory and Workshop Act, 1901 - Allegation that defendants had failed to comply with Regulation 16 (a): "Stages suspended by ropes or chains shall be secured as far as possible so as to prevent their swinging"-Failure of defendants so to secure stage-Fall of workmen from stage-Finding of Justices that case for prosecution had not been proved.

Lloyd's Law Reports