i-law.com

COLFAR v. COGGINS & GRIFFITH (LIVERPOOL), LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 1

Negligence - System of working - Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff stevedore engaged in loading bags of salt by derrick from barge to steamer-Plaintiff working in ship's hold-Sling swung by derrick, sling colliding with coamings-Fall of bags from sling-Claim against employers -Alleged defective system of working- Evidence that sling was loaded with an abnormal number of bags-Negligence of fellow-employees-Common employment. Practice - Pleadings - Allegation of failure to maintain or provide proper system of working.

APPEAL BY JOHN LEWIS, MASTER OF THE STEAMSHIP "RADCHURCH."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 6

Merchant shipping - Inquiry - Conduct of masters of steamships Empire Antelope and Radchurch-Vessels in convoy subjected to severe submarine attack - Abandonment in belief that vessels were hit by torpedo-Reasonable cause for belief - Vessels in fact undamaged - Complaint that vessels were abandoned without sufficient reason - Inquiry by "local Marine Board or by a person appointed"-Finding in each case that the vessel was prematurely abandoned and that the master was from incompetency unfit to discharge his duties-Suspension of certificates - Appeal - Necessity for charges to be stated with particularity- Consideration of facts-Ships carrying iron ore and steel-Liability to sink rapidly after holing - Unsatisfactory arrangements on board concerning emergency signals - Costs - Power of Appeal Court to make order as to costs below - Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, Sect. 471 (1), (3)-Shipping Casualties and Appeals and Re-Hearings Rules, 1923, Nos. 16, 19, 20.

THE "OPALIA."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 16

Collision-Convoy-Evasive action taken to avoid enemy air attack-Collision between steamship Swynfleet and motor vessel Opalia in Thames Estuary-Vessels outward bound, Opalia being immediately behind commodore ship and Swynfleet being towards rear of column-Air attack on convoy-180 deg. turn to port by commodore ship, with instructions to remainder of convoy to "Follow me"- Further 180 deg. turn to port, resulting in commodore ship coming up on starboard side of vessels in rear of column-Contact between port bow of Opalia and starboard side of Swynfleet, which was slightly angled to starboard-Look-out.

THE "DALEBY."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 20

Collision-Dock-Collision between steamships Eurybates and Daleby in West Float, Birkenhead - Eurybates, in charge of three tugs, making her way from East Float to Bidston Dock-Daleby, being warped along quay on south side, blown by gale into centre of float, obstructing passage of Eurybates-Whether Eurybates negligent in failing to bring herself up- Contact between port bow of Eurybates and starboard side of Daleby-Damage aggravated by accommodation ladder projecting over side of Eurybates - Whether Eurybates negligent in that respect - Duty under by-laws - River Mersey By-laws, Rule 10 (d).

THE "WESTBURN."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 24

Salvage - War - Services rendered by tugs Euston Cross and Acklam Cross to steamship Westburn in North Sea-Westburn attacked by enemy aircraft, set on fire and abandoned by crew-Boarded by two of crew of Euston Cross-Towage to Hartlepool commenced by Euston Cross, later assistance being given by Acklam Cross-Risk of Westburn drifting on rocks - Other assistance available - Salved values, £56,000-Awards: Euston Cross, £2650; Acklam Cross, £600.

THE "RHONE."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 28

Collision - River - Starboard-hand rule - Collision between steamship Torpoint and motor vessel Rhone in River Taw - Torpoint bound down; Rhone bound up- Torpoint navigating on port side of channel-Port helm signal sounded inviting Rhone to pass starboard to starboard -Starboard helm signal sounded by Rhone-Port helm action (without any reduction of speed) persisted in by Torpoint -Collision Regulations, Art. 25.

McALISTER v. FORTH PILOTAGE AUTHORITY.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 32

Pilotage-By-laws-Distribution from pool of pilotage dues-Whether by-law ultra vires -Forth (Trinity Howe of Leith) Pilotage Authority By-laws made in pursuance of powers conferred by Sect. 17 of Pilotage Act, 1913-Art. 77: "Should any question arise regarding the distribution of the said Inward Firth Pool amongst the pilots entitled to share therein, such question shall be referred to the Authority, whose decision shall be final"-Action brought by pilot for declarator that Art. 77 was ultra vires in whole or in part -Right to bring action-Pilotage Act, 1913, Sects. 17, 18.

TEMPLE STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD. v. V/O. SOVFRACHT.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 35

Arbitration-Award-Motion to set aside- Notice of application-Extension of time - Dispute between shipowners and Russian charterers-Award in shipowners' favour-Motion by charterers to set aside award on ground of misconduct of arbitrator-Delay in making application -Findings alleged to be unsupported by evidence - Discretion of arbitrator - Appeal by charterers against decision of Lord Caldecote, C.J., refusing to grant extension of time within which to make application to set aside.

THE "ATLAND."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 38

Collision - Convoy - Alteration of course - Signals - Look-out - Collision between steamships Cape Corso and Atland in Atlantic Ocean-Atland in column to starboard of Cape Corso, vessels being second in respective columns-Notification by commodore of subsequent 50 deg. alteration to starboard to be made- Vessels to wheel in succession - Starboarding by Cape Corso in accordance with instructions, whistle signal being sounded-Atland sighted on starboard side about a cable distant and about abeam-Porting by Cape Corso without signal-Contact between starboard bow of Cape Corso and port side of Atland- Collision Regulations, Art. 28.

THE "ANADARA."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 43

Collision - Convoy - Alteration of course - Look-out - Collision between motor vessels Williamstown and Anadara in convoy in English Channel-Speed of Williamstown eased and slight port helm action taken to avoid risk of collision with ship ahead-Anadara seen to be coming up on port quarter-Contact between port bow of Williamstown and starboard side of Anadara-Claim by Williamstown.

THE "ST. USK."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 46

Salvage-Disabled vessel adrift in Bristol Channel - Services rendered by tugs Standard Rose, Blazer, Torfrida and Seine to steamship St. Usk-St. Usk damaged by grounding or by striking submerged object, water entering engine-room and stokehold - Ship, without steam, drifting eastward before strong flood tide and high wind - Grounding on shoal-Beached on Cardiff Flats- Salved values: £32,500 - Awards: Standard Rose, £600; Blazer, £500; Torfrida, £400; Seine, £1000.

THE "IRISH FIR."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 51

Salvage-Engines broken down-Request for assistance-Services rendered by steamship Moelfre Rose to Irish steamship Irish Fir in Irish Sea-Ship towed to Milford Haven, towage occupying about 612 hours -Fine weather service-Consideration of war risk-Other assistance available- Salved values: £82,000-Award: £700- Payment into Court: £1000-Defendants warded costs after date of payment in. -Practice - Excessive bail - Demand by salvors for £15,000 bail-No protest by defendants - Application by defendants that plaintiffs be condemned in costs of providing excessive bail - Exaggerated claim-Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs of providing bail in excess of £5000 - Protest by defendants not essential.

FALLOWS AND ANOTHER v. LEE CONSERVANCY BOARD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 55

Negligence-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff tug-boy-Plaintiff employed on tug navigating River Lee-Tug, towing barges, making her way up river- Passage impeded by barge on each bank- Attempt by tugmaster to push his way through-Collision with barges, plaintiff being thrown into water-Arm crushed between tug and barge-Claim for damages against tugowners-Defence of common employment-Allegations by plaintiff that tug was of defective design; that her steering gear was defective; and that the tugmaster was not properly qualified.

PHILLIPS & CO. (SMITHFIELD), LTD. v. CLAN LINE STEAMERS, LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 58

Bill of lading-Damage to cargo (frozen rabbits)-Shipment of cases of skinned and unskinned rabbits in Australia for United Kingdom-Stowage in refrigerated hold just below hatch-Cargo received for shipment "in apparent good order and condition"-Certified by Australian Government inspector as thoroughly sound and suitable for human consumption, in good order and hard frozen-Delivery damaged-Claim by cargo-owners-Plea by shipowners that damage was due to inherent vice-Evidence of condition of rabbits before shipment and of steps taken by shipowners to ensure safe temperatures during stowage on board-Inference to be drawn from fact that rabbits stowed elsewhere in ship were delivered undamaged- Onus of proof-Australian Sea Carriage of Goods Act, 1924, Schedule, Art. III. Art. IV (1), (2).

OCEAN STEAM SHIP COMPANY, LTD. v. BARCLAY, CURLE & CO., LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 66

Collision - Launching - River Clyde-Duty to give warning under local by-laws- Whether adequate warning given to traffic in river-Collision between motor vessel Myrmidon and vessel Kong Haakon VII just launched-Myrmidon bound up river, in tow of tugs fore and aft -Time of launching advanced by about 25 minutes-Authorities not warned- Obligation upon owners of launched vessel to place flag boats up and down river of line of launch-Evidence of warning given by police boat and by head tug's "full astern" signal-Flag boats in position- Whether pilot of Kong Haakon VII failed to see that river was clear before exhibiting launching flag-Possibility of stopping launch when Myrmidon was seen to be approaching - Look-out on Myrmidon- Visibility - Clyde Navigation By-laws, Rule 34.

FALMOUTH DOCKS & ENGINEERING COMPANY v. LIEUTENANT DAVID PEARSON, R.N.R. [THE "FIR."]

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 77

Negligent navigation - Damage to jetty - Minesweeper moored to jetty in Falmouth Harbour-Heavy weather, with wind of gale force and increasing ground swell- Moorings parted, ship breaking adrift- Unsuccessful attempt to anchor-Engines ordered ahead-Collision with Queen's Jetty, belonging to plaintiffs-Evidence of precautions taken on board-Duty watch -Look-out-Failure to use searchlight.

THE "ACCRUITY."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 81

Collision-Convoy-Fog - Signals - Collision between steamship Kenrix and motor vessel Accruity in English Channel- Kenrix originally astern of Accruity in same column-Descent of thick fog-Fog signals sounded by commodore vessel and by Kenrix-Signal by commodore vessel that fog buoys were to be streamed- Vessels sighted by each other close to, on converging courses, with Accruity on port bow of Kenrix-Fog signals not sounded by Accruity-Duty to sound-Fog buoy not streamed - Merchant Navy Code, Art. 56: "The unrestricted use of whistles or sirens by ships of a convoy in fog is undesirable and is apt to cause confusion"-Discretion of master.

THE "GLENDINNING."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 86

Collision - Consequential damage - Novus actus interveniens - Collision between steamships Betswood and Glendinning off Blyth-Vessels on practically opposite courses, showing dimmed lights, approaching starboard to starboard-Starboarding by Betswood under mistaken impression that green of Glendinning was stern light of vessel ahead - Porting by Glendinning when red of Betswood opened on starboard bow-Failure of either vessel immediately to take off way -Contact between port bow of Betswood and starboard side aft of Glendinning at four-point angle leading forward on Glendinning-Glendinning badly damaged by collision-Steam steering gear out of action-Vessel leaking-Attempt to enter Blyth Harbour without assistance-Low water-Further serious damage due to grounding - Whether consequence of collision.

NORWEGIAN SHIPPING & TRADE MISSION v. BEHENNA.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 91

Negligence - Stevedores - Damage to ship's winch-Defective condition of winch- Stevedores' knowledge of defective condition -Stevedores employed to load plaintiffs' steamship from another ship in Swansea Docks-Cargo hook attached by stevedore to stay on winch when loading finished, steam being turned on to tighten, runner-Inability to turn off steam, winch frame being damaged- Claim by shipowners against stevedores.

WAGLE v. A. & R. BROWN, LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 94

Negligence-Personal injuries to shipworker -Safe plant-Duty of employers to provide and maintain-Plaintiff engaged in lifting cylinder cover by means of rope tackle-Rope insecurely knotted-Fall of cylinder cover-Whether due to a failure by the employers to provide and maintain or to the casual negligence of a fellow workman.

MIZEN v. C. J. KING & SONS, LTD., AND PORT LINE, LTD. (J. JEFFERIES & SONS, LTD., THIRD PARTIES.)

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 96

Negligence-Docks Regulations, 1934-Breach of statutory duty - Unfenced hatch - Absence of adequate lighting-Unsafe means of access-Workman, employed by J. & Sons, engaged in repair work to steamship-Ship being unloaded by stevedores - Workman killed by fall into unguarded hold in 'tween decks-Evidence that stevedores had put stanchions and guard chains round 'tween deck hatch when unloading was completed a short time before the accident-Action brought by widow (1) against shipowners for common law negligence; (2) against shipowners and stevedores for breach of statutory duty-J. & Sons joined by defendants as third parties-Docks Regulations 12, 37.

THE "MARLBOROUGH."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 102

Salvage - Lifeboatmen as salvors - Risk to lifeboat-Responsibility of lifeboatmen- Services rendered by lifeboat John and Charles Kennedy to trawler Marlborough ashore near Rosehearty (Aberdeenshire)- Trawler abandoned by crew-Derelict- Lights left burning-Risk of air attack- Towed off by lifeboat and taken to Fraserburgh -Salvage services admitted-Scale of award-Whether lifeboatmen personally responsible to R.N.L.I. for damage to or loss of lifeboat in undertaking salvage services-R.N.L.I. Regulations, Nos. 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110.

A. F. HENRY & MACGREGOR, LTD. v. ABERDEEN HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 107

Harbours - Damage to ship - Grounding - Liability of harbour authorities-Pursuers' steamship Barra Head moored at Matthews Quay, Aberdeen, ready to leave port-Instructed to leave by harbour-master -Grounding on her passage out, about 134 hours before low water, ship refloating without assistance about 20 minutes after low water-Dispute as to locus of grounding-Whether within or outside navigable channel- Averment by pursuers that there was insufficient water in the navigable channel at the time when the ship was ordered to leave.

FREDERICK LEYLAND & CO., LTD. (J. RUSSELL & CO.) v. COMPANIA PANAMENA EUROPEA NAVEGACION, LIMITADA.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 113

Contract-Repairs to ship-Claim by repairers for balance of amount due from shipowners -Purchase of damaged ship by T. on behalf of C.-Ship registered as in ownership of Panamanian company, of which T. and wife were sole directors- Power of attorney executed by company giving full powers to C.-Repairs to ship in London authorised under licence from Ministry of War Transport-Estimate requested from plaintiffs - Tender of £40,000 as an approximate figure rejected by C.-Requisition by Government-Work commenced by order of Ministry under supervision of Ministry surveyors, of British Corporation surveyor, and of T., also a ship-surveyor, on behalf of C.- Subsequent agreement between Ministry, repairers and shipowners (C.), transferring all rights in vessel to shipowners, who were to be responsible for cost of repairs- Right of shipowners' surveyor to inspect and exercise reasonable supervision of repairs-"7. The owners shall pay for the repairs upon the ordinary commercial basis . . . Payment shall be effected as required by the repairers on the basis of cash against expenditure during the progress of the work and the ascertained balance on the completion of the repairs and every such payment shall be effected promptly by the owners after the issue of a certificate by the owners' surveyor that the work has been satisfactorily carried out and on receipt of a certificate of the amount due issued by the Costs Investigation Branch of the Ministry of War Transport and certifying that same has been checked and found correct (and the Minister agrees to procure that the said Costs Investigation Branch shall so certify and issue certificates). . . . Such last - mentioned certificates shall be accepted by the parties hereto as final and conclusive and shall not be questioned except as regards any error appearing on the face thereof and of which due notice shall forthwith be given to the said Costs Investigation Branch"-Certificate issued by Costs Investigation Branch certifying expenditure by repairers-Refusal by T. to issue certificate that work had been satisfactorily carried out-Construction of Clause 7-Whether T. was entitled to refuse to issue certificate if, although repairs were satisfactory in quality, the cost was in his opinion excessive- Repairers' tender not a firm offer-Position of T. considered-Contention by shipowners that the issuing of a certificate by their surveyor was a condition precedent to the repairers' right to receive payment; further, that cost of repairs was excessive -Whether T. acted unreasonably in refusing to issue certificate.

THE "COULMORE."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 129

Collision - Convoy - Look-out - Lights - Collision between steamships Avon Coast and Coulmore in North Sea-Avon Coast leading vessel in south-bound convoy; Coulmore making her way across course of Avon Coast's convoy to join north-bound convoy-Vessels sighted by each other at distance of about two cables-Loom of Avon Coast sighted by Coulmore on port bow; red of Coulmore sighted by Avon Coast on starboard bow-Dispute as to when Coulmore switched on her navigation lights.

THE "EMPIRE SQUIRE."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 134

Collision-Convoy-Change of course-Lookout -Lights-Collision between steamships Runswick and Empire Squire in North Sea off Peterhead-Runswick acting as commodore ship at head of column; Empire Squire third ship in same column -Instructions given to ships in convoy that turn to port would be made at certain buoy-Turn made by Runswick, whistle signal being sounded-Loom of Empire Squire sighted by Runswick, heading at about right angles across her course-Contact between stem of Runswick and starboard side of Empire Squire -Dispute as to headings of ships at collision -Look-out on Runswick-Whether Empire Squire was exhibiting her navigation lights upon approaching turning buoy.

-Consequential damage-Runswick escorted to Peterhead Bay by tug-Taken to place of anchorage by pilot-Only one anchor available - Heavy weather - Dragging-Severe grounding damage sustained -Whether a direct consequence of collision.

HINDMARSH AND ANOTHER v. BRIGHAM & COWAN, LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 141

Repairs to ship - Commission - Account - Memorandum of agreement dated Mar. 1, 1930, between H. and B. & C. under which H., subject to certain exceptions, was to receive commission on repairing work "to all Bristol Channel vessels" executed by B. & C. at South Shields and Hull - Death of H. on Oct. 12, 1938-Commissions due-Claim brought by personal representatives of H. against B. & C.-Right of H. to commission in respect of repairs to C. N. Co. ships and to D. Line ships-H. employed as marine superintendent of C. N. Co.- Conflict of interest - Contentions by defendants (1) as regards D. Line ships, that such vessels were expressly excluded by oral agreement between the parties; (2) as regards C. N. Co. ships, that H. was not entitled to commission on such vessels because his principals, C. N. Co., had not expressly assented to such an arrangement-Payment into Court.

MAY v. NATIONAL DOCK LABOUR CORPORATION, LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 156

Dock Labour Scheme (London)-Attendance money-Port transport workers in reserve pool required to attend certain number of calls in particular port sector assigned to them by port manager; to proceed to and accept any employment for which they are suitable to which they way be directed by the port manager in connection with (inter alia) port transport work; and to travel for such employment to any other port or place as directed-Workers surplus after calls to proceed to control point to prove attendance, when workers' cards are stamped with "attendance stamps"-Port workers not entitled to attendance money "during that pay week" in case of non-compliance with above provisions-Various requisitions made by port manager for port workers "at other ports or places" -Requisitions within knowledge of plaintiff (tally clerk)-Failure by plaintiff (in one instance) to go to control point to get his book stamped-Deliberate delay by plaintiff (in another instance) in going to control point-Offer made to port manager after office closed-Book taken by port manager-Attendance money withheld- Claim against National Dock Labour Corporation Ltd.-Dock Labour Scheme (London), Clauses 8 (j), 15, 18.

LEFEVER v. NATIONAL DOCK LABOUR CORPORATION, LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 160

Dock Labour Scheme (London)-Attendance money - Lighterman - Suitable employment -"A port transport worker . . . shall carry out the instructions of the port manager and in particular shall . . . proceed to and accept any employment for which he is suitable"-Plaintiff lighterman in reserve pool directed by port manager "to proceed to and accept employment" with Messrs. C.-Ordered to "back wheat" with corn-porters - Refusal-Whether suitable for work-Card not stamped with "attendance stamp"- Attendance money not paid-Claim against National Dock Labour Corporation, Ltd.-Dock Labour Scheme (London), Clauses 15, 18 (a), 21, Schedule 3.

THE "ALGOMA."

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 165

Collision-Convoy-Single vessel crossing- Look-out - Lights - Collision between steamship Tolworth and trawler Algoma in North Sea-Tolworth ninth vessel in port column of north-bound convoy: Algoma southward-bound - Collision in vicinity of turning buoy for north and south-bound vessels-Algoma, out of the usual position for a south-bound vessel, proceeding at full speed in middle of Tolworth's convoy-Red light of Algoma sighted by Tolworth on starboard bow- Whether Tolworth immediately switched on her lights.

SHEARING v. MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF THE BOROUGH OF TORQUAY. [THE "QUERCUS."]

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 170

Harbour authorities-Defective moorings- -Duty of inspection - Maintenance - Plaintiff's yacht secured to moorings in defendants' harbour-Break adrift during gale-Gale not abnormal-Yacht only vessel which parted her moorings-Dispute as to cause-Latent defect in mooring chain - Kinking - Evidence of annual inspection of chain by diver - Whether adequate-Onus of proof.

AMRITLAL OJHA & CO., LTD. v. EMBIRICOS.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 175

Charter-party - War - Risk of capture - Refusal to sail-Charter of Greek steamship before outbreak of war for voyages in Far East-Provision in charter "that no voyage be undertaken, and no goods, documents or persons shipped that would involve risk of seizure, capture, repatriation or penalty by rulers or governments" -Ship engaged in carriage of coal on Indian coastal voyages up to middle of November, 1939-Captain then instructed by owners that owing to presence of German raider in Indian Ocean he should refuse to sail with coal or other contraband cargo-Refusal by captain to sail with charterers' coal cargo from Calcutta to Port Okha (Bombay) - Claim by charterers for damages for breach-Evidence of activities of raider indicating that there was in fact no risk of capture -Meaning of "risk"-Whether there was such a risk as changed the character of voyage.

TEMPLE STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD. v. V/O SOVFRACHT.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 182

Charter-party-Breach by charterers-"One round voyage to"-Redelivery-Charter of ship to be delivered at a Bristol Channel bunkering port "for a period of one round voyage to the Kara Sea. . . . To be employed in lawful trades . . . between good and safe ports or places within the following limits: United Kingdom, Continent, South Africa, Baltic, White Sea, Murmansk, Mediterranean not east of Greece (excluding Spain and Spanish possessions) and Igarka, Yenissei River, Kara Sea, with liberty to call at ports or places en route and including Spitzbergen (Barentsburg and Grumant City) and Dikson. . . . To be redelivered . . . at an ice-free port in charterers' option in South Africa Cape Town/Lourenco Marques range"-Ship sent in ballast to Igarka-Timber cargo loaded, ship sailing for Durban on Sept. 1, 1939 -Ordered by U.S.S.R. authorities while still in Russian waters to put into Murmansk and discharge her cargo- Arrival at Murmansk on Sept. 9-Discharge completed by Sept. 29-Ship unable to obtain immediate clearance from Russian authorities-Evidence of negotiations between British and Russian government authorities as to release of ships in Russian waters-Loading of pitprops commenced on Nov. 8 and completed on Nov. 17, ship then sailing for Garston- Arrival at Garston on Dec. 14, ship being requisitioned by British Government after discharge-Claim by shipowners against charterers-Alleged breach in failing to order ship to proceed to South Africa immediately after discharging at Murmansk and in sending the ship to Garston with a cargo of pitprops-Construction of charter-party-Obligation of charterers- Customary meaning of "one round voyage to" - Arbitration - Award in favour of shipowners-Case stated.

GARCIA v. HARLAND & WOLFF, LTD.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 192

Master and servant-Accident to workman employed by ship-repairers-Common law liability of employer:-Safe system of working-Shipbuilding Regulations, 1931 -Occupier-Workman engaged in repair work on board ship in wet dock-Killed by fall into unguarded hold while returning from meal-Absence of adequate lighting -Claim by widow (as administratrix of husband's estate) under Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1934- "It shall be the duty of the occupier to comply with Parts I to VIII" of the Shipbuilding Regulations - Admitted breach of Regulations-Whether defendant ship-repairers liable as "occupiers" -Shipbuilding Regulations re-enacted under Factories Act, 1937-Interpretation - Whether defendants liable as "occupiers of a factory"-Common law duty of employers to provide safe system of working on premises belonging to others-Precautions necessary for workmen's safety-Factories Act, 1937, Sects. 60, 106, 159-Shipbuilding Regulations, 1931, Regulations 1, 10, 42.

SUTCH v. BURNS.

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 203

Motor insurance-Third-party risks-Liability of underwriters - Third-party policy covering lorry belonging to C. Ltd.- Compliance with Sect. 35 (1) of R.T.A., 1930-Lorry driven by W.-Delivery of rolls of paper to premises of M. Ltd.-W. requested by foreman of M. Ltd. to load up with other rolls of paper and take them to premises of M. Ltd. on other side of road, S. and others (employees of M. Ltd.) riding on lorry-S. thrown off and killed -Action brought by widow against C. Ltd. and W.-Judgment entered against W.-Action against C. Ltd. dismissed on ground that W. in allowing S. and others to ride on lorry was acting outside the scope of his employment- Judgment against W. unsatisfied- Present action brought by widow on policy-Plea by underwriters that driver was only covered if driving in such circumstances as would make his employers liable-"A person issuing a policy of insurance under [Sect. 36 of the R.T.A., 1930] shall be liable to indemnify the persons or classes of persons specified in the policy in respect of any liability which the policy purports to cover in the case of those persons or classes of persons"- Policy required to cover "such person, persons or classes of persons as may be specified in the policy in respect of any liability which may be incurred by him or them in respect of the death of or bodily injury to any person caused by or arising out of the use of the vehicle on a road"- R.T.A., 1930, Sects. 35 (1), 36 (1), (4).

NEWBOLD v. MINISTER OF WAR TRANSPORT. [THE "VAILIMA."]

(1943) 76 Ll L Rep 208

Ship-Requisition of yacht-Valuation.

Lloyd's Law Reports