We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. Close

Lloyd's Law Reports RSS feed


Workmen's compensation-Election-Accident sustained by plaintiff dock labourer while working in defendants' motor vessel Accra-Plaintiff incapacitated -Compensation paid by defendants -Legal advice taken by plaintiff -Claim brought at common law - Alleged breach of statutory duty - Further payments by defendants receipted by plaintiff "without prejudice" -Contention by defendants that plaintiff had elected to accept payments under Workmen's Compensation Act and that he was therefore precluded from bringing his action at common law-Damages-Recovery of sums paid-Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925, Sect. 29 (1).

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 1


Negligent navigation-Damage to lock gates-Claim against master of sailing barge Leslie West-Barge, proceeding up River Blackwater, intending to enter Chelmer and Blackwater Canal by way of Heybridge lock - Claim by canal proprietors against barge-owners -Limitation by barge-owners-Claim by canal proprietors against master for excess of damages not recovered from owners-Whether barge was proceeding at too great a speed to enable the manoeuvre to be executed in safety - Evidence of independent witnesses - Duty of canal proprietors-Lockkeeper usually in attendance to throw a rope, but absent on occasion in question.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 10


Contract - Insurance - Breach of agreement to insure - Probationary Speedway Rider's Agreement entered into between defendants and J - Provision that defendants would "keep the rider insured against personal accident risks whilst racing and practising therefor in accordance with the rules and requirements of the Auto-Cycle Union, the rider contributing 3s. 6d. per meeting towards the premium therefor" - Speedway Regulations, No. 101: "No track shall be used for a meeting or for practice therefor until it has been licensed by the A.C.U., which may grant, refuse, withhold, suspend or revoke a licence at its discretion"-J killed while practising on unlicensed track-J not covered against such risk-Claim by plaintiff administrator against defendants for breach of agreement to insure-Whether J was "practising . . . in accordance with the rules and requirements of the A.C.U." - Insurance policy with restricted cover provided by defendants and insuring J only against accidents while racing or practising on defendants' own track -Evidence that riders were insured while racing or practising on other licensed tracks by the promoters of those tracks-Speed way Regulations- Construction.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 16


Fire insurance - Fraud - Insurance of Plant Bros.' buildings and contents- Policies issued by insurance corporation and by Lloyd's underwriters - Indorsements providing that interest in policies was vested in Plant Bros., Scoffin & Willmott and Midland Bank "for their respective rights and interests" - Interest of Scoffin & Willmott limited to freehold rights in part of buildings - Midland Bank interested as debenture holders-Fire -Claim made by Plant Bros.-Loss paid by insurers, cheques sent being made payable to Plant Bros., Scoffin & Willmott and Midland Bank-Indorsements by payees, amounts being paid into Plant Bros.' account at Midland Bank-Subsequent discovery that fire was due to arson by Plant Bros.' works manager and that their claim was made fraudulently and fraudulently exaggerated - Claim by plaintiff insurers for declaration that Plant Bros., Scoffin & Willmott and Midland Bank were liable to repay amounts paid in respect of fire loss-No appearance by Plant Bros.-Liability of Scoffin & Willmott and Midland Bank-Evidence of matters leading up to settlement of fire loss-Manner of payment-Lloyd's policy indorsed by Plant Bros.: "Pay all claims to W. & M."-Payments made to W. & M., who sent own cheque to Plant Bros.-Position of W. & M. considered.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 25


Collision - River - Plaintiff vessel C.W.S. Progress manoeuvring to enter Garston North Dock-Defendant vessel in river after leaving Garston Old Dock-Letty about two points on starboard bow of C.W.S. Progress, and with her starboard side open to the C.W.S. Progress -Starboard helm action by Letty- Port helm action by C.W.S. Progress -Full astern action by both vessels immediately before collision-Contact between stem and starboard bow of Letty and starboard side aft of C.W.S. Progress - Collision Regulations, Art. 19.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 42


Salvage or towage-Services rendered by tugs Standard Rose and Blazer to steamship Trevorian in Cardiff Channel-Standard Rose engaged to assist Trevorian from Queen Alexandra Lock-Failure of Trevorian to keep her course after leaving lock - Unexplained cause-Connection established by Standard Rose with port bow of Trevorian-Tow-rope parted on two occasions - Standard Rose then made fast to starboard quarter of Trevorian, which had swung to the northward, tug Blazer (which happened to be in vicinity) being requested to make fast to port bow-Trevorian slewed round to her proper southward course, when tugs cast off and she proceeded under her own steam-Subsequent return to port on account of propeller damage- Entry in log recording that vessel struck submerged object subsequent to services rendered by tugs-Suggestion by plaintiffs that the Trevorian's sheers from her normal course were due to damage already sustained when taken in tow.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 45


Collision-Overtaking or crossing courses- Collision between steam trawlers Nubia and Olvina off Spurn Light-vessel- Vessels outward bound to fishing grounds - Contention by Nubia that Olvina, overtaking on starboard side, suddenly ported across Nubia's bows, making collision inevitable-Contention by Olvina that vessels were on crossing courses, with the Nubia as the give-way vessel, and that she failed to give way - Contact between stem of Nubia and port quarter of Olvina- Duty of overtaken vessel.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 51


Negligence - Factories Act, 1937 - Shipbuilding Regulations, 1931-Breach of statutory duty-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff boilermaker plater employed by R. & Co., ship-repairers- Ship being repaired "in public dry dock" on hire to R. & Co. by Port of London Authority-Fall from steps of dry dock-Steps in ruinous condition -Action brought by plaintiff against P.L.A. and R. & Co. - Duty of "occupier" to maintain steps and to provide safe means of access-Meaning of "occupier" - Conditions of hire contained in "Application for the use of a dry dock" made and signed by R. & Co. - Third-party proceedings brought by R. & Co. against P.L.A. to be indemnified against plaintiff's claim - Whether P.L.A. impliedly warranted that all statutory requirements as to the safe condition of the dock had been complied with-Alleged contributory negligence of plaintiff- Law Reform (Married Women and Tortfeasors) Act, 1935, Sect. 6 (2).

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 57


Charter-party - Demurrage - Exceptions clause-Pursuers' vessel chartered by defenders to load and discharge cargo of potatoes-Cargo to be loaded and discharged in four days - Discharge delayed owing to frost which (defenders averred) "would have caused serious damage to the cargo"-Provision in charter-party that "Any time lost during usual working hours at the port owing to bad weather shall not be counted. . . . If the vessel is detained longer than the time allowed for loading and/or discharging demurrage shall be paid at £12 per day. Time to commence after the steamer is ready to receive and deliver, but not to commence to count between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. or between noon on Saturday and 8 a.m. on Monday (unless used), and with the usual exceptions of Sundays and holidays, riots, strikes, frosts or other accidents beyond charterers' control"-Whether the circumstance of frost resulting in damage to cargo was a matter contemplated by and within the exceptions clause- Construction.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 71


Charter-party - Discharging expenses - Plaintiffs' steamship chartered to load cargo of fruit in Spain to be discharged in London-"24. The cargo to be brought to and taken from alongside at merchant's risk and expense, and to be properly stowed and discharged by a regular stevedore appointed by charterers or their agents, at the risk and expense of the steamer. . . . 25. The steamer to be discharged in the customary manner and where ordered by the charterers or their agents. The charge not to exceed what other steamers pay (at London according to the tariff in force on the 1st January, 1935). . . . 26. Steamer to be cleared by charterers' agents at loading ports and also at port or ports of discharge. Any bonus or other usual pecuniary consideration allowed by stevedore and/or wharfinger or dock company in respect of the berthing of the vessel to belong to agents or charterers and owners to have no claim thereto" - Discharge effected by stevedores appointed by defendants, agents for charterers - Tariff rate for discharge by stevedores. 16s. per 100 packages - Custom for wharfingers to make allowance to stevedores of 1d. per package off published rate, that rebate being passed on to the charterers or their agents- Deduction by defendants of discharging expenses (based on full tariff rate) from freight due to plaintiffs-Contention by plaintiffs that deduction should be based on customary reduced charge -Claim by plaintiffs for balance- Construction of charter-party.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 77


Collision-Fog-Excessive speed-Collision between British motor vessel Lobos and Italian motor vessel Virgilio off the entrance to Callao Harbour in fog- Lobos outward bound from Callao; Virgilio inward bound to Callao- Vessels on approximately opposite courses - Contact between stem of Virgilio and port side of Lobos-Lobos beached to avoid sinking-Evidence of speeds and whistle signals-Look-out.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 83


Motor insurance-Third-party liability- Extension to cover authorised driver -Right of driver to be indemnified against claim by policyholder - Applicability of arbitration clause- Policyholder indemnified by Sect. 2 of policy against "(1) All sums which the policyholder shall become legally liable to pay in respect of any claim by any person (including passengers in the automobile) for loss of life or accidental bodily injury. . . ."- "(3) The insurance under this section shall also extend to indemnify in like manner any person whilst driving any automobile described in the Schedule hereto on the order or with the permission of the policyholder, provided there is no other insurance subsisting under which such person may be indemnified, and that such person shall as though he were the policyholder observe fulfil and be subject to the terms exceptions and conditions of this policy in so far as they can apply. . . ." -Condition 8: "If any difference shall arise between the policyholder and the Corporation, such difference shall be referred with all usual powers to two arbitrators mutually chosen or their umpire, or to one arbitrator if the policyholder and the Corporation shall so agree, and an award shall be a condition precedent to any liability of the Corporation or any right of action against the Corporation" - Collision with another car - Personal injuries sustained by policyholder (travelling as passenger), car being driven by policyholder's chauffeur D.-Action brought by policyholder against other car-D. joined as defendant-Damages awarded against D.-Action brought by D. against insurance company to be indemnified under policy-Action not proceeded with-Matter referred to arbitration without prejudice to insurance company's plea that D. had no arbitration rights under policy - Award in favour of D.-Case stated- Questions for opinion of Court: (1) Whether D. was entitled to avail himself of the arbitration provided for in the policy. (2) Whether, on that assumption, he was entitled to recover the sum of damages awarded against him-Meaning of "third party"- Road Traffic Act, 1930, Sects. 35 (1), 36 (1) (b), 36 (4).

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 89


Sale of goods (c.i.f.)-Documents- Rejection by buyers as being bad tender- Damages for non-shipment - Arbitration clause-Jurisdiction of arbitrator -Sale of wood goods by Russian shippers to English buyers, "the goods to be shipped at Igarka during 1937 navigation or as soon thereafter as suitable tonnage obtainable but this latitude is limited to twenty-one days" -Price to include c.f. and i. to United Kingdom ports - "Shiproom to be secured by sellers in due time; they, however, not to be responsible for any delay in shipment occasioned by circumstances beyond their control"-"It is hereby understood and agreed that any disputes under this contract which cannot be settled amicably, except such as refer to the quality, condition, measurement, or manufacture of, or correctness of documents for, goods shipped, shall be referred to" arbitration in Moscow-Excepted matters to be subject of English arbitration in accordance with English Arbitration Acts - Arrangements made by sellers for transhipment at Murmansk-Bills of lading to be in "Russwood form" -Transhipment bills of lading dated Oct. 18, 1937, tendered by sellers - Bills signed by representative of "Chief Administration of Northern Route"-Policies and invoices tendered covering goods other than contract goods - Rejection of documents by buyers-Dispute "as to the correctness of the documents tendered" submitted to arbitration in England - Jurisdiction of English arbitrator - Arbitrator's findings that he had jurisdiction to determine the right to reject and to make an award of damages for non-delivery; that none of the goods covered by the documents tendered was shipped "during 1937 navigation"; that buyers were entitled to reject the bills of lading, policies and invoices as being incorrect; and that they were entitled to damages based on the average difference between the contract and market prices-Case stated-Questions for the opinion of the Court: Whether upon the facts found by the umpire and upon the true construction of the contracts of sale and of the documents tendered to the buyers by the sellers the buyers were entitled (a) to an award declaring that the buyers were entitled to reject the documents; and (b) to an award of damages.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 103


Motor insurance-Voidable policy-"Cause or permit" use of vehicle on road- Motor van purchased by W.B. with money advanced by H.B.-Van to be driven by W.B. and used in his business -Proposal for insurance signed by W.B., H.B. being declared as the proposer and registered owner-Fatal accident in which G. was killed-Policy avoided by insurers on ground of misrepresentation-Claim by plaintiff (as dependant of G.) against both H.B. and W.B.-Whether a valid policy in force- Road Traffic Act, 1930, Sect. 35 (1): ". . . It shall not be lawful for any person to use, or to cause or permit any other person to use, a motor vehicle on a road unless there is in force in relation to the user of the vehicle by that person or that other person, as the case may be, such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third-party risks as complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act"-Plaintiff's contention that H.B. caused or permitted the user of the motor van on a road when there was not in force a policy covering third-party risks in accordance with Act - Plaintiff's claim against H.B. dismissed by Hilbery, J. -Appeal.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 129


Contract-Breach-Loss of use of tractor and excavator-Measure of damages- Contract by defendant shipping company to transport plaintiffs' tractor and excavator from Doncaster to Guernsey by defendants' steamship S-Plaintiffs' equipment to be used under contract in Guernsey-Failure of defendants to provide proper land transport-Shipment in defendants' steamship B one week later, Guernsey contract thereby being delayed one week-No evidence of specific pecuniary loss-Assessment of damages for loss of use-Cost of equipment: £4500- Estimated life: 3 years - Plaintiffs awarded £250-Appeal by defendants.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 134


Practice - Stay of action - Arbitration clause - Charter by plaintiffs (Rumanian firm) of Egyptian steamship for carriage of sawn timber from Galatz to Garston-"13. If the nation under whose flag the steamer sails shall be at war, whereby the free navigation of the steamer is endangered, or in case of blockade or prohibition of export of sawn timber from the loading port, this contract shall be null and void at the last outward port of delivery or at any subsequent period when the difficulty may arise, previous to cargo being shipped. 21. All disputes from time to time arising out of this contract shall, unless the parties agree forthwith on a single arbitrator, be referred to the final arbitrament of two arbitrators carrying on business in London, who shall be members of the Baltic and engaged in the shipping and/or grain trades, one to be appointed by each of the parties, with power to such arbitrators to appoint an umpire. Any claim must be made in writing and claimant's arbitrator appointed within three months of final discharge and where this provision is not complied with the claim shall be deemed to be waived and absolutely barred"-Outbreak of war before charter took effect -Notice given by owners of intention to cancel charter-Arrival of vessel in England to undertake British Government charter - Arrest of vessel by plaintiffs-Motion by shipowners to set aside writ and release vessel on ground that matter should be referred to arbitration under Clause 21 - Motion upheld by learned Assistant Registrar- Appeal by charterers - Right of shipowners to claim arbitration-Whether steps taken by them intimated total repudiation of the charter and its terms -Meaning of "null and void"-Scott v. Avery clause-Discretion of Court to refuse stay.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 139


Charter-party-Frustration-Impossibility of performance-Explosion on board- Charter of vessel Kingswood to load cargo at Port Pirie-Arrival in Port Pirie Roads - Violent explosion in auxiliary boiler before vessel became "an arrived ship"-Delay caused by damage such as to frustrate commercial object of adventure - Claim by charterers for damages for failure to load- Plea by shipowners that contract was frustrated and that they were thereby relieved from liability-"Accidents of navigation" excepted by charter-party -Arbitration-Finding of arbitrator that "the explosion was one of an unprecedented character and no sequence of events which was other than improbable was suggested as capable of having given rise to it"-Award that charterers were entitled to recover - Case stated-Onus of proof of impossibility of performance-Australian Sea Carriage of Goods Act, 1924, Schedule, Art. IV (2) (a) and (p).

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 147


Sale of goods-War risk insurance-Contracts dated Oct. 6 and 7, 1938, for sale of timber by Finnish shippers to English buyers-Charter of Spanish steamer by shippers' agents on Oct. 18 -Copies of charter sent to buyers on Oct. 26-Clause of contract of sale providing that "Before or as soon as tonnage is secured the marine insurance of cargo at f.o.b. invoice value plus 10 per cent. and of freight advance to be covered by sellers with a first-class company or underwriters . . . as per Lloyd's form of policy, together with Federation Clauses printed in margin, losses payable in London and including the risks covered by the Institute War and Strike Clauses in force at the time of attachment of the insurance. Any increase in premium payable for covering the whole of such war risks and such strike risks in respect of the country of destination in excess of the rates ruling at 26th September, 1935, to be for buyers' account. Sellers' obligation under this contract to insure against war and/or strike risks is subject to the proviso that such insurance can be covered. Should it not be possible to cover such insurance, or should insurance be cancelled by underwriters, sellers shall give prompt telegraphic advice to buyers who shall thereupon have the option of cancelling the contract" -Insurance effected by shippers, cover note providing that "Wood goods in and over including freight advance, if any, per El Neptuno to Hull including war, etc., risks at 3s. 6d. per cent. sailing on or before 5th November, 1938, held covered thereafter at schedule rate on date of sailing but subject to 48 hours' notice of cancelment unless sailing on or before 28th November, 1938"-Sailing delayed until after Nov. 5-Schedule rate at date of sailing: 2s. 6d. per cent. - Substantial rise in war risk rates in respect of Spanish vessels - Premium fixed by shippers at £5 per cent.-Rate ruling at Sept. 26, 1935: 3d. per cent.- Liability of buyers to pay increase in premium-Construction of contract- Chartered ship belonging to belligerent -Onus of proof that such charter was justified - Arbitration - Award in favour of shippers-Case stated.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 167


Marine insurance-Peril of the sea- Stranding - Negligent docking of plaintiff's yacht-Arrangements made by plaintiff for ship-repairing company to move yacht from Southwick to company's slipway at Shoreham for cleaning and repairs-Manager of company in charge of yacht during voyage and docking - Obstruction in slipway - Yacht seriously strained-Obstruction removed-Vessel undocked and redocked - Further damage sustained owing to uneven nature of slipway- Cause of damage-Right of recovery under marine insurance policy-Meaning of "perils of the sea"-Policy subject to Institute Yacht Clauses providing that "This insurance also specially to cover . . . loss of or damage to hull or machinery directly caused by . . . negligence of master, mariners, engineers or pilots" - Measure of recovery - Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, Sect. 742.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 174


Bill of lading-Damage to cargo of apples -"Brown heart"-Cargo shipped at Hobart "in apparent good order and condition"-Delivered at Hull severely affected by "brown heart"-Claim by cargo-owners against shipowners- Whether damage resulted from inherent vice or from failure of shipowners properly to carry, keep and care for the apples-Cargo examined by Commonwealth Government inspectors before shipment-Expert evidence upon cause of damage-Excessive concentration of carbon dioxide - Instructions given to ship's officers as to care of such a cargo - Records of carbon dioxide content of holds-Australian Sea Carriage of Goods Act, 1924, Schedule, Arts. III, IV.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 184


Contract-Breach-Application made by German Jewish national for accommodation in British steamship to proceed on world cruise-Application made through Cook's, in Berlin, to German subsidiary company representing defendants in Germany - Deposit paid, followed by payment of balance of full passage money-Payment made in Inland Reichsmarks- Deposit receipt made out by defendants acknowledging receipt of full fare, and indorsed "No refund of value whatsoever may be made outside Germany" - Residence in Holland subsequently taken up by plaintiff- Repudiation of contract by defendants, it being pleaded that the performance of the contract had become illegal by reason of decrees and orders issued by the German currency authorities- Amount of passage money paid into "blocked account" in German bank for credit of plaintiff-Claim by plaintiff for damages and/or for return of fares paid.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 206


Collision - Turning in river - Plaintiffs' lighter Teme (in tow of tug Nethergarth) bound down River Usk- Defendants' steamer Ingerfem (with tug Dunson fast ahead) turning in river preparatory to entering south entrance to Alexandra Docks, Newport -Steamship Gallium anchored head to flood tide a little above and in line with upper pierhead of dock entrance-Teme manoeuvred between Ingerfem and Gallium - Collision between stem of Teme and stern of Gallium-Duty of vessel turning in river-Respective duty of vessel navigating in river- Newport Harbour By-laws, Rule 14: "Every vessel crossing the river, and every vessel turning in the harbour, shall be navigated so as not to cause obstruction, injury, or damage to any other vessel."

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 235


Collision-Crossing courses-Fishing vessel and steamship - Lights - Collision between plaintiffs' motor fishing vessel Vierge des Mers and defendants' steamship Domino - Vessels on crossing courses, with the Domino as the giveway vessel - Dispute as to lights displayed by fishing vessel-Deck lights- Whether misleading-Duty of stand-on vessel - Look-out - Collision Regulations, Arts. 19, 21.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 240


Collision-Anchored vessels-Red navigation light displayed on anchored vessel - Steamships Cape St. George and Saranac anchored in line in Walton Bay - Steamship Ariguani bound up river on flood tide-Red light of Cape St. George opened about 112 points on starboard bow of Ariguani, about one-quarter of a mile away - Starboard helm action taken by Ariguani - Collision between port quarter of Ariguani and port bow of Cape St. George - Subsequent and more serious collision between port bow of Ariguani and port bow of Saranac-Dispute as to whether red navigation light was being exhibited by Cape St. George-Whether Ariguani misled thereby - Duty of Ariguani under Collision Regulations-Seamanship-Sudden danger-Apportionment of blame-Whether second collision was the result of a subsequent act of negligence on the part of the Ariguani - Collision Regulations, Arts. 19, 22, 23, 27.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 244


Collision-Fog-Vessel coming to anchor- Collision between Greek steamship Chryssi and Portuguese steamship Maria Cristina in River Maas - Chryssi, outward bound, athwart the river in the course of coming to anchor owing to dense fog - Maria Cristina also outward bound, following Chryssi - Contact between stem of Maria Cristina and starboard side of Chryssi-Chryssi sunk-Onus of proof -Lights - Speeds - Visibility - Local by-law enjoining vessel turning in river to sound certain signal-Whether that signal should be sounded in fog.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 256


Collision - Fishing vessels - Lights - Collision just after sunrise between steam trawlers Dandini and Barbara Robb in fishing grounds off N.E. coast of Scotland-Dandini laid to, heading approximately east - Barbara Robb trawling on northerly course S.S.W. of Dandini - Impacts between stem of Barbara Robb and starboard side of Dandini - Dandini sunk - Respective duties-Look-out-Fishing lights improperly shown by Dandini - Alleged failure of master of Barbara Robb to set proper deck watch of two men - Vicarious liability of master (1) for negligence of crew; (2) for failure to set proper watch.

(1940) 66 Ll.L.Rep. 264