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

THE "SKARABORG."

Collision - Narrow channel - Starboard-hand rule-Collision between German steamship Hermia and Swedish steamship Skaraborg in Gravesend Reach, River Thames-Hermia bound down; Skaraborg bound up-Ebb tide-Porting by Skaraborg to pass astern of Customs' launch crossing river-Port helm signal then sounded to Hermia- Starboard helm signal sounded by Hermia-Engines put at "slow," then at "stop" and later at "full astern" -Duty of vessels to pass port to port- Whether special circumstances of the case made departure from the Rule necessary-Collision just outside southern limit of dredged channel-Look-outs -Speeds-Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rule 33.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 1

S. & R. STEAMSHIPS, LTD. v. LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL.

Negligence-Nuisance-Bridge owned by London County Council (defendants) at entrance to Deptford Creek-Bridge having two bascule arms-Bascules raised to permit passing of steamer- Steamer closely followed by barge- "All clear" given by look-out man immediately upon passing of steamer- Bascules lowered on to barge-Failure of eastern bascule to attain horizontal position-Forced down by tramcar- Subsequent inability to raise bascules- Fracture found to bedplate-Detention of plaintiffs' steamship in Deptford Creek - Claim for damages - Non-feasance or misfeasance - Cause of fracture to bedplate-Whether due to latent defect and/or to sudden braking by operator of bridge.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 9

ROBSON AND OTHERS v. SYKES.

Seamen - Articles - Scope of voyage - Refusal by members of crew of British steamship to comply with order to proceed to American port to load nitrate for Spanish port-Spain within geographical limits of voyage prescribed by articles-Civil war in progress in Spain when articles signed-Nitrate usable both as fertiliser and as component in high explosive-Whether such voyage outside the scope of voyage contemplated by the articles-Information preferred against members of the crew under Sect. 225 (1) (e) of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, it being alleged that they combined to impede the navigation of the ship - Appeal by crew against conviction and fines imposed by learned Stipendiary, allowed by learned Recorder-Appeal by shipowners against decision of Recorder- Case stated.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 16

REDERI A/B ERUTHS v. LILLIE & CO. (PORTSMOUTH), LTD.

Charter-party-Cancellation-Balance of freight-Charter by defendants of plaintiffs' steamship to load cargo of timber from shippers at Trangsund for Portsmouth - Freight payable: 59s. per St. Petersburg standard hundred-"Charterers shall have the option of cancelling this charter if vessel is not ready at [Trangsund] to load on or before Dec. 15, 1937"-Cable sent by charterers' agents to ship's agents on Dec. 15: "Trangsund Portsmouth telegraph if steamer loading otherwise charter-party cancelled" -Arrival of vessel at Trangsund on Dec. 17 - Loading commenced immediately by shippers-Master and shippers unaware of purported cancellation - Shippers subsequently informed, but cargo loaded without protest - Full charter-party freight demanded by master - Protest by charterers-Freight paid by charterers at estimated current market rate per standard (40s.)-Balance of 19s. per standard deposited with solicitors- Claim by shipowners for payment out -Counterclaim by charterers for return of deposit-Whether cable of Dec. 15 effected cancellation-Contention by shipowners that charterers waived cancellation; further, that charterers were estopped from alleging cancellation.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 21

THE "CLAN MACFADYEN."

Collision-Fog-Collision between H.M.S. Faulknor and steamship Clan Macfadyen off Ushant-Faulknor on course S. 54 W. true; Clan Macfadyen on course N. 55 E. true-Contact between starboard side of Faulknor and starboard bow of Clan Macfadyen at an angle of 17 deg.-Fog signals heard forward of the beam on each vessel- Duty under Collision Regulations, Art. 16-Speeds-Helm action-Look-out.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 31

THE "ARRAIZ."

International law - Ship - Arrest of Spanish steamship Arraiz (port of registry: Bilbao) by Spanish National Government - Decree requisitioning vessel dated March, 1938-Writ issued against ship and against master- Motion by Spanish Republican Government that writ be set aside-Ship in possession of Spanish Republican Government under decree of June, 1937, requisitioning ships "registered at the port of Bilbao"-Previous arrest by owners of Arraiz raised following decision of House of Lords in the Cristina, 60 Ll.L.Rep. 147, upon a motion by the Spanish Republican Government that vessel had been requisitioned under the decree of June, 1937, and that they were impleaded by the owners' writ - Evidence that Spanish National Government exercised de facto administrative control over territory in which Bilbao was situated.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 39

GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SPAIN v. NORTH OF ENGLAND STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD.

Charter-party-Breach-Chamber of Shipping war clauses-Refusal by owners to proceed to nominated port - Charter by plaintiffs of defendants' steamship Hartbridge - Vessel to load cargo of coal at Dunston Staiths, River Tyne, and proceed to one of six named ports on south-east coast of Spain-Freight, to be prepaid: 26s. 6d. per ton-"The bills of lading . . . shall be signed by the master, agent or owners . . . within 24 hours after the vessel is loaded" - War clauses: "1. The master shall not be required or bound to sign bills of lading for any blockaded port or for any port which the master or owners in his or their discretion consider dangerous or impossible to enter or reach. 2. ( A) If any port of discharge named in this charter-party or to which the vessel may properly be ordered pursuant to the terms of the bills of lading be blockaded, or ( B) if owing to any war, hostilities, warlike operations, civil war, civil commotions, revolutions, or the operation of international law (a) entry to any such port or discharge of cargo intended for any such port be considered by the master or owners in his or their discretion dangerous or prohibited or (b) it be considered by the master or owners in his or their discretion dangerous or impossible for the vessel to reach such discharging port- the cargo or such part of it as may be affected shall be discharged at any other safe port in the vicinity of the said port of discharge as may be ordered by the charterers . . ."-Six named ports in territory occupied by Spanish Republican Government - Announcement by Spanish Nationalist Government that it was intended to establish a blockade of Spanish coast-Resolution passed by owners' insurance club, the effect of which was that to cover

vessel against war risks on voyage to any of named ports would involve considerable additional outlay-Intimation given to charterers by owners, before giving of notice of readiness, that by reason of the declaration of a "blockade" they (the owners) would not acept orders for discharge at any of named ports and requesting a "danger free port outside of the range mentioned" -Evidence that blockade did not materialise and that there was no greater danger to British shipping after the declaration than before; and that Nationalist Government claimed "that measures taken by its naval forces on patrol are neither legally nor technically equivalent to a blockade"-Loading of steamer commenced-Charterers requested by owners, before loading completed, to nominate "safe and danger free port"-Refusal by owners to accept orders to discharge at Barcelona - Intimation made to charterers that cargo would be discharged at Gibraltar if "danger free" port not nominated-Nomination of Oran under protest by charterers- Vessel discharged at Oran-Market rate of freight to Oran: 6s. 9d.-Claim by charterers for freight overpaid-Duress of good-Meaning of "blockade"- Reliance by owners upon war clauses- Time when war clauses apply-Discretion of master or owners.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 44

N. V. KUNSTMESTHANDEL VOORHEEN L. TEN CATE AND ANOTHER v. DIAMOND FERTILISER & CHEMICAL COMPANY, LTD.

Sale of goods-Rejection-Excess delivery of bulk cargo-Sale of potash by plaintiffs to defendants "in good merchantable condition for fertiliser" - Shipment: September, 1933, to March, 1934, "at buyers' option in parcels of minimum 200 [metric] tons" - "Each delivery is to stand as a separate contract"-"Any sale shall be subject to the Dutch law and commercial customs and shall be considered as having been concluded at Utrecht" - Part accepted by defendants - Balance to be delivered: 387,963 kilos- Amount tendered: 398,690 kilos-Right of defendants to reject-Evidence of Dutch law and custom-Suggestion that sellers were allowed a latitude of 5 per cent. more or less in case of bulk delivery-Whether potash "in good merchantable condition"-Delivery of balance in two lighters and with two invoices-Whether two deliveries.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 59

"MAISOL" (OWNERS) v. EXPORTLES, LTD.

Charter-party-Loading-Charter of vessel "now trading and expected ready to load end September/early October"- Charterers' option to cancel if vessel not ready at first loading port on or before Oct. 10-"6 (c). In the case of a vessel loading in October, charterers undertake to load vessel, clear the cargo, and present the master with bills of lading for signature in time to enable the pilot to take the vessel out of the port not later than Oct. 31, failing which charterers shall pay to the shipowner the actual amount paid to underwriters for extra insurance on current policies, excepting in cases of delay attributable to the fault of the shipowner, the shipowner crediting any rebate from underwriters as and when received"-Arrival at port of loading on Nov. 6-Claim by shipowners to extra premiums payable-Meaning of "loading in October"-Cause of delay -Arbitration-Award in charterers' favour-Case stated.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 65

WINDSOR v. CHALCRAFT.

Practice-Judgment by default-Right of stranger to action to set judgment aside-Claim against defendant by administrators of deceased cyclist killed in collision with defendant's car -Defendant insured against third-party liability-Writ issued by administrators against defendant - Insurers informed of issue of writ- Judgment entered against defendant in default of appearance-No notice of service or of subsequent proceedings given to insurers - Claim by administrators against insurers for amount of judgment-Application by insurers to have judgment set aside and to be allowed to enter an appearance to the writ in their own name or in name of nominal defendant - Notice of application served on all parties- Rules of the Supreme Court, Order 27, r. 15: "Any judgment by default, whether under this Order or under any other of these Rules, may be set aside by the Court or a Judge, upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as such Court or Judge may think fit . . ."

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 69

IRVIN & JOHNSON (SOUTH AFRICA), LTD., AND ANOTHER v. UNILEVER, LTD.

Contract-Breach of warranty-Alleged verbal warranty as to term of written contract-Price-Contracts entered into in November, 1934, whereby plaintiffs agreed to sell to defendants the whole of their 1934/1935 and 1935/1936 production of whale oil at £8 10s. per ton- Negotiations leading up to contracts- Contract between defendants and C dated May, 1934, as a basis of negotiation - Terms of contract with C providing (inter alia): "(2) The oil to be of good merchantable quality of the various grades, or a fair allowance to be made . . . (3) The price to be paid . . . £8 10s. per ton . . . (16) If in addition to the above-named quantity buyers purchase prior to the 15th September, 1934, any further whale oil ex season 1934/1935 at any higher price than this contract, then the price of this contract shall be increased accordingly . . . (18) Sellers have the option, to be declared on or before the 21st May, 1934, to renew this contract for same quantities, same agreed prices, and same terms and conditions for the season 1935/1936"- Option to renew exercised by C- Subsequent refusal by C to deliver 1935/1936 season's oil on the ground that his contract was frustrated by reason of Norwegian Government restrictions - Action commenced by defendants against C-Plaintiffs also in some difficulty owing to restrictions - Claim for allowance - Offer by defendants to settle with plaintiffs on basis of the result of the action against C or on basis of £9 per ton for 1934/1935 oil and £11 per ton for 1935/1936 oil-Acceptance by plaintiffs of allowance based on £9 and £11 per ton - Settlement of action between defendants and C on basis of £13 15s. per ton - Claim by plaintiffs for damages for breach of warranty -

Allegation that defendants verbally warranted that their contract with plaintiffs would be on the same terms as contract with C-Defence: that there was no warranty; if there was, that there was no breach; further, that there was accord and satisfaction.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 75

THE "DUX."

Negligent navigation-Grounding of plaintiffs' lighter Seabird in River Trent- Seabird, in tow of tug Ferryman, bound up river-Defendants' keel Dux working her way up river along the east bank by means of boathooks-Dux blown away from bank, drifting across course of tow-Grounding of Seabird in consequence of helm action taken to avoid Dux-Total loss of Seabird and cargo.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 84

THE "WOODLARK" AND THE "WEST HYDE."

Collision-Turning in river-Collision between plaintiffs' barge Stour (in tow of tug Abbotsbury, which was also towing five other barges) and first defendants' steamship Woodlark, in Limehouse Reach, River Thames-Plaintiff flotilla, having rounded under port helm, bound up river-Woodlark bound down river -Second defendant's tug West Hyde (towing two lighters), having rounded under port helm, bound down river just ahead of Woodlark-Porting by Woodlark-Place of collision-Look-out -Speed-Duty of vessel turning in river-Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rule 23.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 89

"Z" STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD. v. AMTORG, NEW YORK.

Charter-party - Dispatch money - Deduction from freight-Claim by shipowners against charterers for overcharged dispatch money - Plaintiffs' vessel chartered by defendants to load cargo of coal at Mariupol and proceed to Boston, U.S.A., to discharge - "5. Steamer. . . . to be loaded at the average rate of 600 tons per weather working day, Sundays, official and local holidays excepted. Charterers have the right of working during the excepted periods, also at night time, without counting the time, they paying all extra expenses incurred thereby . . . 6. Cargo to be taken out of steamer's holds discharged and received by merchants at their risk and expense and to be discharged at the average rate of 800 tons per weather working day, Sundays, official and local holidays excepted whether used or not. . . . Time allowed for loading and discharging as per Clauses 5 and 6 to be reversible. 8. Owners shall have a lien on the cargo for freight, dead freight, demurrage and damages for detention. Charterers shall remain responsible for dead freight and demurrage (including damages for detention), incurred at port(s) of loading. Charterers shall also remain responsible for freight, dead freight, and demurrage (including damages for detention) incurred at port(s) of discharge, but only to such extent as the owners have been unable to obtain payment thereof by exercising the lien on the cargo. 20. Owners to pay charterers £15 (fifteen pounds) per day or pro rata dispatch money for all time saved in loading and discharging, to be settled at each end if required by charterers. 30. . . . Saturdays and days preceding general or local holidays to count only as three quarters of a day whether used or not. On Monday and the day after general or local holidays, time not to count until 8 a.m. whether used or not"-Lien on cargo not exercised by shipowners-Whether

claim for freight enforceable against charterers-Time occupied in loading and discharging-Meaning of "day" -Monday preceding holiday-Calculation of dispatch money - Whether laytime reversible for purpose of calculating dispatch money-American legislation affecting coal industry- Local arrangement agreed between employers and employees in coal trade at Boston whereby Saturday was recognised as a holiday - Whether an "official" or "local" holiday within the meaning of the charter-party.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 97

PETROS M. NOMIKOS, LTD. v. ROBERTSON.

Marine insurance-Freight policy-Institute Time Clauses (Freight):- (5) In the event of the total loss, whether absolute or constructive of the steamer the amount underwritten by this policy shall be paid in full, whether the steamer be fully or only partly loaded or in ballast, chartered or unchartered. (6) 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.

Vessel chartered-Explosion and fire on board-Charter abandoned-Election by owners to repair although cost of repairs exceeded insured value- Claim for partial loss paid by hull underwriters-Claim by shipowners to recover amount underwritten by freight policy on ground of constructive total loss of steamer, based on Institute Time Clauses (Freight) No. 5-Meaning of "constructive total loss"-Necessity for abandonment-Marine Insurance Act, 1906, Sects. 60, 61, 63.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 105

THE "BEAU LEIGH."

Collision-Sheer after touching ground in river-Collision between steamship Bristol City and motor vessel Beau Leigh at bend in River Avon- Bristol City bound down; Beau Leigh bound up- Allegation by Beau Leigh that Bristol City was navigated so close as to cause suction of water from Somerset side, resulting in Beau Leigh touching ground and sheering to port-Whether Bristol City keeping to her proper side of channel-Plea that Bristol City failed to comply with Resolution of City of Bristol requiring vessel going down river against the flood tide to stop above sharp bends to avoid passing upcoming vessels at such bends.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 113

THE "SENTRY."

Collision-Steering and sailing rules- Duty of steam vessel to keep out of way of sailing vessel - Collision between sailing barge Macklands and steamship Sentry in Woolwich Reach, River Thames-Macklands tacking down river; Sentry bound up-Contact between stem of Sentry and portside of barge-Allegation by Sentry that barge, which crossed her bows on the starboard tack, negligently failed to sail out her tack but winded too soon on to the port tack- Respective duties of steamship and sailing vessel.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 118

SMITH v. CORNHILL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.

Motor insurance - Accident - Death of assured-Claim by executrix of deceased that defendant insurance company were liable under their policy in the sum of £1000 - Car found on its side in undergrowth 10 yards off road-Deceased discovered in stream a short distance from car-Medical evidence that deceased, who was in good health, had suffered severe head injuries and that she had died from heart failure due to shock on entering water -Liability of defendants under policy providing that "The company will pay (a) £1000 in the event of death, provided that death occurs within six weeks from the date of the accident and as the result solely of bodily injury caused by violent accidental external and visible means sustained by the insured whilst riding in mounting into or dismounting from the insured car" -Whether death occurred "as the result solely of bodily injury" caused by the accident-Chain of causation- Intervening and independent cause.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 122

KAWASAKI KISEN KABUSHIKI KAISYA, OF KOBE v. BANTHAM STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD.

Charter-party-Cancellation by owners- War-"31. Charterers and owners to have the liberty of cancelling this charter-party if war breaks out involving Japan"-Evidence of extensive fighting in China between Chinese and Japanese armies-No declaration of war made-Diplomatic relation maintained -Letter from British Foreign Office stating that "His Majesty's Government are not at present prepared to say that in their view a state of war exists"-Right of owners to cancel-Construction of charter-party -Arbitration-Award that war had broken out involving Japan and that owners were entitled to cancel-Case stated.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 131

LIBEROPULOS v. VLASSOPULO BROS. AND ANOTHER.

Ship-Management-Voyage accounts- Insurance moneys-Ownership of Greek steamship Maria-Plaintiff owner of 18/100th shares-Constructive total loss of vessel-Moneys paid by insurers under policies-Plea by defendants that plaintiff, before the loss of the ship, had entered into binding contract to sell her shares to defendants-Admission by defendants during course of case that no such contract had been entered into-Duty of defendant ship managers to account-Whether defendants failed in their duty to produce all relevant documents.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 140

A. F. WATKINSON & CO., LTD. v. HULLETT.

Fire insurance-Risk-Proposal form- Non-disclosure-Insurance of plaintiffs' stock of waste-paper - Loss - Claim -Defence that risk underwritten was the stock of a paper-board manufacturer -Dispute as to the facts known to the underwriter upon the placing of the risk-Evidence of proposal form and policy.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 145

W. J. TATEM, LTD. v. GAMBOA.

Charter-party-Frustration-Thirty days' charter by defendant of plaintiffs' steamer from time of delivery at Santander-"Steamer to be employed . . . within the following limits: North Spain (Government ports) and French Bay ports for the evacuation of civil population from North Spain"- "Charterers to pay hire at the rate of £250 British sterling per day, commencing [as above] until her re-delivery to owners" - Steamer delivered to charterer on July 1, 1337-Thirty days' hire paid in advance-One voyage performed-Seizure by Spanish insurgent forces on July 14-Released on Sept. 7-Re-delivery to owners on Sept. 11 at Bordeaux-Claim by owners for hire up to date of re-delivery-Contention by charterers that charter-party was frustrated immediately upon seizure-Consideration of doctrine of frustration - Risk of seizure - Contemplation of parties - Unforeseen circumstances.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 149

HALL BROTHERS STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD. v. YOUNG.

Marine insurance-Collision clause-Collision between insured vessel and French pilot vessel-Insured vessel in no way to blame-Liability of insured vessel under French law for cost of repairs to pilot vessel-"And it is further agreed that if the ship hereby insured shall come into collision with any other ship or vessel and shall in consequence thereof become liable to pay and shall pay by way of damages to any other person any sum or sums in respect of such collision, the undersigned will pay the assured such proportion of three-fourths of such sum or sums so paid as their respective subscriptions hereto bear to the value of the ship hereby insured. . . ."-Construction of collision clause-Liability of insurers under policy-Whether sum paid by insured vessel "by way of damages."

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 157

WARR v. VALKERING.

Sale of goods-Rejection-Sale of parcel of Iraquian barley, May shipment - Delivery to buyer on July 29-Buyer's suspicion that barley was shipped out of time-Barley warehoused by buyer- Arbitration claimed on quality on Aug. 6-Rejection of barley on Sept. 16 - Right to reject - Opportunity of examination-"Lapse of a reasonable time"-Whether arbitrators were entitled to find that buyer had lost his right to reject-Sale of Goods Act, 1893, Sects. 34, 35.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 163

THE "STAR OF THE ISLES."

Collision-Breaking away from harbour moorings - Inevitable accident - Collision between pursuers' steam trawler Pelagos and defenders' steam trawler Star of the Isles in Oban Harbour- Pelagos moored starboard side to quay; Star of the Isles moored outside Pelagos -Breaking adrift of Star of the Isles during gale-Damage to Pelagos- Proof of damage-Plea by Star of the Isles of inevitable accident-Onus of proof-Evidence of moorings laid out by Star of the Isles-Whether sufficient -Allegation that Star of the Isles was insufficiently manned, resulting in her inability to use her engine at the critical time-Form of action-Competency of procedure by way of preliminary act-Whether an action of damages arising out of a collision at sea-Rules of Court of the Court of Session, Chapter III, r. 10.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 168

THE "THEEMS."

Admiralty practice-Ship-Limitation of liability-Rate of interest-Collision between plaintiffs' steamship Theems and defendants' steam trawler Notre Dame de Lourdes-Trawler sunk with loss of seven of crew-Offer by plaintiffs to pay into Court sum based on £8 per registered ton and to go bail for further sum based on £7 per registered ton in respect of life claims, with interest at 4 per cent. from date of collision until payment-Contention by defendants that interest in limitation actions should be paid at the rate of 5 per cent. (which was the usual rate in ordinary damage claims).

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 177

THE "NETHERGARTH."

Collision-Narrow channel-Lights-Collision between motor vessel Pisgah and tug Nethergarth in River Severn- Pisgah bound up; Nethergarth bound down-Vessels green to green when Nethergarth first seen by Pisgah- Endeavour by Pisgah to maintain that position-Starboarding by Nethergarth -Allegation by Nethergarth that Pisgah was not showing her navigation lights-Duty of vessels meeting in narrow channel-Collision Regulations, Art. 25.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 181

THE "ST. ANGUS."

Collision-Illness of master at wheel- Inevitable accident-Collision between plaintiffs' steamship Hartford and defendants' motor vessel St. Angus off Greenhithe, River Thames-Hartford moored at buoy; St. Angus bound down -Hartford admittedly free from blame -Defendants plea of inevitable accident in that master (solely in charge of navigation) fainted at wheel owing to the effects of food poisoning, that the wheel was starboarded in his falling, and that the vessel, left to its own resources, turned and collided with the Hartford on the southern side of the river-Onus of proof of inevitable accident- Whether collision could have been avoided by the exercise of reasonable maritime care and skill.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 186

THE "AJAX."

Collision-Steering and sailing rules- Collision between sailing barge Lord Roberts and motor vessel Ajax in Halfway Reach, River Thames-Lord Roberts bound up; Ajax bound down- Vessels approaching each other with both side lights open-Porting by Lord Roberts, red light being shut in-Porting by Ajax to pass green to green- Subsequent starboarding by Lord Roberts to pass port to port-Contact between port side of Lord Roberts and stem of Ajax-Duty of vessels in such circumstances-Look-out-Helm action.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 190

McCARTHY v. BRITISH OAK INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.

Motor insurance-Social, domestic and pleasure purposes-Hiring-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in collision with car driven by R-Car borrowed from C for purpose of taking R and friends on pleasure trip- R reimbursed cost of petrol and oil by S, friend of R and passenger in car- C (and persons driving with his consent) insured with defendant insurance company against accidents incurred while car used for social, domestic and pleasure purposes-Exclusion when being driven for hire - Whether arrangement amounted to hiring by S.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 194

BURTON v. DOBSON SHIP REPAIRING COMPANY, LTD.

Workmen's compensation - Review of weekly payments-Accident incurred in August, 1932, when respondent, aged 16, employed by appellants as apprentice-shipwright -Compensation paid, based on earnings at that time-Application for review made to appellants in December, 1937, just before respondent attained age of 21 years and 6 months- Date when apprenticeship would have finished: Feb. 23, 1938-Arbitration proceedings for review commenced before learned County Court Judge on May 19, 1938-Compensation increased as from Feb. 24, 1938, the Judge basing his award on the fact that as from that date the respondent would, if uninjured, have earned £3 per week as a fully qualified journeyman-"Date of the review"-Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925, Sect. 11 (as amended by Act of 1926).

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 199

THE "ANDANIA."

Collision-Inevitable accident-Fog-Collision between steamships British Statesman and Andania in Long Reach, River Thames - British Statesman moored at wharf; Andania bound up- Plea by Andania that she was suddenly enveloped by fog and that she came into collision before she could bring up- Andania proceeding at high speed- Warning given by passing ship of dense fog ahead-Engines reduced to "slow" for half minute; stopped when in dense fog-Election then to turn to starboard, port engine being put at "slow ahead"-Look-out.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 203

THE "TORSOL."

Collision-Damages-Objection to Registrar's report-Allowance of costs of action brought by third-party-Collision between Norwegian steamship Torsol and British steamship Kennebec in River Thames - Settlement of liability on basis: Torsol, 40 per cent.; Kennebec, 60 per cent.-Torsol damaged by collision-Action brought by stevedores, engaged to unload timber cargo, for extra expenses incurred in discharging, owing to claim by men for "danger money"-Stevedores' claim amounting to £600-Action defended by owners of Torsol - Judgment recovered by stevedores-Costs of action amounting to £1250-Allowance by Registrar of £150.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 207

THE "ERINDRING."

Collision - Turning in river - Collision between German steamship Capri and Danish steamship Erindring in River Severn-Both vessels bound up for Sharpness Dock-Flood tide-Capri ahead-Port wheel turn by Capri, assisted by tug, preparatory to entering dock-Capri passed by Erindring for purpose of turning above Capri- Contact between port side of Erindring and stern of Capri- Suggestion that Capri came bodily astern.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 212

VSESOJUZNOJE OBJEDINENJE "EXPORTLES" v. T. W. ALLEN & SONS, LTD.

Sale of goods-Rejection-Faulty manufacture -"Shippers' usual marks"- Sale of unsorted redwood and strips- Specification: "Severoles production - Leningrad bracking" - "3. The goods are to bear shippers' usual marks, to be properly seasoned for shipment to the country of destination and to be of sellers' usual bracking, average length and fair specification for such description of goods. . . . 11. No complaint or claim for quality and/or condition will be recognised by sellers upon any goods shipped under this contract, unless reasonable particulars are given to agents within fourteen days, and the goods in respect of which a claim is made are produced ready for inspection within twenty-one days, both from date of ship's final discharge. . . . Reasonable particulars shall mean a statement as to whether the claim is for condition and/or quality and/or other defects which are to be named. 15. . . . Buyers shall not reject the goods herein specified but shall accept or pay for them in terms of contract against shipping documents. . . . 19. 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 the U.S.S.R. Chamber of Commerce Foreign Trade Arbitration Commission in Moscow, whose decision shall be final and binding upon both parties . . ." -Notice of claim made by buyers (1) on ground that some of goods were not seasoned; (2) on account of bad manufacture; (3) on ground that part of goods did not bear shippers' usual marks-Inspection declined by sellers on ground that claim was out of time- Arbitration-Award (1) that sellers were not liable for the buyers' claim

based on quality and/or condition; (2) that the sellers were liable for the buyers' claim based on faulty manufacture; (3) that the buyers were entitled to reject goods not marked with the shippers' mark - Case stated - Questions for opinion of Court: (1) Whether the buyers were entitled after the expiration of 14 days to give notice of claim on the grounds of faulty manufacture and that the goods did not bear the shippers' usual mark; (2) Whether the buyers were entitled to reject such of the goods on the ground that the did not bear the shippers' usual mark.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 217

THE "STANDALE."

Bill of lading-Bad stowage (wheat in bulk and bags)-Unseaworthiness-Loss of defendants' vessel and cargo - Sudden development of list during voyage from Antwerp to Carthagena- Claim by cargo-owners - Contention that cargo was improperly stowed and that vessel was inadequately fitted for carriage of cargo - Onus of proof - Defence: that loss of vessel and cargo was due to perils of the sea-Evidence of condition of vessel, of the weather experienced, and of the method of stowage of the cargo - Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, Sect. 452 (1), Schedule 18 (1), (2), (3).

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 223

W. WEDDEL & CO., LTD., AND ANOTHER v. PENINSULAR & ORIENTAL STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY.

Bill of lading-Damage to plaintiffs' cargo (frozen ox kidneys)-Received for shipment in London by defendants' steamer in "apparent good order and condition" -Instructions given to defendants on plaintiffs' behalf that goods, which were in bond in London, were to be shipped to Gibraltar-Defendants subsequently informed that port of destination should be Port Said - Failure by defendants to carry out further instructions - Goods erroneously put ashore at Gibraltar, kept in cold store there and later transhipped to Port Said-Goods found to be unmerchantable on arrival at Port Said-Evidence of steps taken to ensure that goods were kept in good condition both before and after shipment in London -Onus of proof that goods were sound on shipment.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 232

WILENSKO SLASKI TOWARZYSTWO DREWNO v. FENWICK & CO. (WEST HARTLEPOOL), LTD.

Sale of goods-Rejection-Sale of pitprops by claimants to respondents - Specification: "About 1000 standards 4/10 ft. lengths, fair proportion of lengths, of which the 4/6 feets to be 4/512 in. tops with maximum 10% 212/312 in. tops, the 612/10 feets to be 212/512 in. tops of which about 50% 212/312 in. tops, 5% 2 in. tops to be allowed. Fair proportion of tops within each stipulated range and over remainders. Inches in tops not to exceed feet in length" - Shipment January, 1938 - Price: 150s. per Gothenburg scale standard c.i.f. West Hartlepool-"Buyers shall not reject goods herein named nor any part of them" - Agreement to ship by two vessels, separate shipping documents being tendered in respect of each consignment - Rejection by buyers of documents relating to consignment by first vessel on ground that specification did not com ply with contract terms- Specification amended by claimants, documents then being re-tendered - Amended documents also rejected - Tender of documents relating to second shipment, on the face of them in order, rejected - Arbitration - Finding by umpire that both consignments were substantially different from goods described in contract, whether consignments considered separately or together -Award that respondents were entitled to reject first documents tendered and that as contract was a single indivisible contract that rejection absolved the respondents from taking up the second consignment, even though those documents were in order - Case stated - Right of buyers to reject in case of instalment contract.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 249

FINSKA ANGFARTYGS AKTIEBOLAGET AND OTHERS v. BARING BROS. & CO., LTD.

Contract - Assignment - Requisition of Finnish vessels by Russian Government in 1916 and 1917-Vessels placed at disposal of British Government- Russian Government paid by British Government-Finnish shipowners not paid-Claim by Finnish shipowners against English bank who held funds deposited with them by Russian Government before Bolshevik Revolution -Part of funds standing to credit of separate account at bank entitled the Compte Spécial - Plaintiffs' ?legation that they were legal assignees of specific parts of the Compte Spécial equal in amount to the sums due in respect of the vessels- Circumstances in which Compte Spécial came into existence-Procedure followed with regard to payments out of the Compte Spécial-Evidence of directions given by Russian Government Department concerning payments to be made to plaintiffs-Production of copies of documents issued by responsible departments of Russian Government.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 257

THE "CORSEA."

Collision - River - Starboard-hand rule - Vessel crossing river-Collision between steamships Ruahine and Corsea in Gallions Reach, River Thames - Ruahine, having undocked from King George V Dock, proceeding down river to northward of steamship Nalon anchored immediately below to northward of mid-channel; Corsea crossing river from south side to Gallions Jetty on north side-Contact between stem of Ruahine and port side of Corsea- View of each vessel obstructed by presence of Nalon - Necessity for special precautions as to look-out - Whether Ruahine negligent in proceeding down river to northward of Nalon - Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rule 33: "Every steam vessel proceeding up or down the river shall when it is safe and practicable keep to that side of mid-channel which lies on the starboard side of such vessel and when two steam vessels proceeding in opposite directions the one up and the other down the river are approaching each other so as to involve risk of collision they shall pass port side to port side unless the special circumstances of the case make departure from this By-law necessary" - Rule 34: "Every steam vessel crossing from one side of the river towards the other side shall do so at a proper time having regard to vessels navigating up and down the river, and shall be navigated so as not to cause obstruction injury or damage to any other vessel."

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 266

THE "AIZKARAI MENDI."

Collision-Damages-Loss of expectation of life-Claims by dependants under Fatal Accidents Acts - Collision between plaintiffs' steamship Borée and defendants' steamship Aizkarai Mendi-Borée sunk, nine of crew losing their lives-Apportionment of blame: Borée, one-fifth; Aizkarai Mendi, four fifths - Reference to Registrar - Objections to report: by defendants, that damages awarded under Fatal Accidents Acts were excessive; by plaintiffs, that equal awards of £150 for loss of expectation of life, without regard to the ages of the deceased men, could not be justified - Method of assessment - Right to interfere with Registrar's award on a matter of quantum - Interest on life claims - Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1934.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 274

THE "HAUK."

Collision-Narrow channel-Collision between British steam trawler Gregory and Norwegian steamship Hauk in Vest Karmsund, Haugesund-Gregory southward bound; Hauk northward bound-Dispute as to place of collision -Evidence of courses taken by each vessel-Look-out-Whistle signals.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 282

HAWKES v. MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND BURGESSES OF TORQUAY.

Public Authorities Protection Act, 1893- Negligence - Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff-Fall of frame suspended at side of box-office window of concert hall owned by defendant Corporation-Statutory authority of defendants to lease land to third parties for purpose of erecting hall, or to erect hall themselves and maintain it as a place of amusement or lease the hall to third parties for similar purposes-Failure of plaintiff to bring action within six months- Whether defendant Corporation protected by Act of 1893-Proof of negligence -Special damage.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 289

THE "MALACCA MARU."

Collision-Overtaking collision-Collision between German steamship Marienfels and Japanese steamship Malacca Maru in River Hooghly-Both vessels outward bound-Marienfels at speed of 1112 knots overtaking Malacca Maru at speed of 10 knots-Respective duties of vessels-Evidence that Marienfels was about half a length ahead of Malacca Maru when Malacca Maru by reason of tide began to gain; that Marienfels then ported, increasing her lateral distance from 400 ft. to 600 ft.; and that when vessels were abeam the Malacca Maru, owing to an eddy which prevailed at that point, sheered to port into the Marienfels-Whether Marienfels attempted to pass "at any of the turning points or bends of the river"-Collision Regulations, Arts. 24, 25-Rule 5 of Local Rules for Navigating River Hooghly.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 293

THE "JONATHAN C. HOLT."

Collision-Vessels meeting end on- Collision between Norwegian motor vessel Ferm and British steamship Jonathan C. Holt, in North Sea- Patchy fog-Visibility-Sighting by each other at three-quarters of a mile -Starboard helm action by Ferm; port helm action by Jonathan C. Holt- Contact between stem of Ferm and starboard side of Jonathan C. Holt- Speeds - Engine action - Collision Regulations, Art. 18.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 301

THE "ARANTZAZU MENDI."

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

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 309

THE "CABO SACRATIF."

Salvage-Services rendered by H.M. destroyer Gallant to Spanish steamship Cabo Sacratif ashore near Cabo Sacratif-Claim by officers and crew against cargo-Evidence that vessel was badly aground on lee shore; that she was unable to extricate herself; and that even if she had refloated without assistance there were other shoals and rocks in the vicinity-Vessel refloated by Gallant and towed to Motril-No evidence of other available assistance-Services occupying three and a half hours-Value of cargo: £31,000.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 317

THE "HUMBER."

Collision - Lights - Manning - Collision between steamship Enid Mary and sloop Humber, in River Humber- Foggy weather-Both vessels bound down river, Humber navigating on port tack ahead of Enid Mary-Contact between stem of Enid Mary and starboard quarter of Humber-Respective duties of steamship and sailing vessel in such circumstances-Allegation that Humber was insufficiently manned; that she was not exhibiting her side lights; and that she was not sounding for fog-Unseamanlike distribution of duties of deck officers on board Enid Mary-Collision Regulations, Arts. 2, 5-Humber By-laws, No. 7.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 321

WILSON v. TANKERS, LTD.

Negligence-Breach of statutory duty- Safe means of access to ship-Ship at quay side-Death of ship's cook-Fall between ship and quay when returning to ship-Claim by dependant against shipowners-Whether gangway properly secured-Docks Regulations, 1934.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 328

KAWASAKI KISEN KABUSHIKI KAISYA v. BANTHAM STEAMSHIP COMPANY LTD.

Charter-party - Withdrawal of vessel by owners from charterers' service-Contention that tender of hire was made out of time-Charter of vessel from time of delivery for 12 calendar months at 3s. 9d. per ton on deadweight "as ascertained on delivery from builders' yard", hire commencing from day of delivery-"5. Payment of said hire to be made in London in cash monthly, in advance, and for the last month or part of same the approximate amount of hire, and should same not cover the actual time, hire is to be paid for the balance day by day, as it becomes due, if so required by owners . . . otherwise failing the punctual and regular payment of the hire . . the owners shall be at liberty to withdraw the vessel from the service of the charterers . . . Delivery to count from 7 a.m. on the working day following that on which written notice has been given before 4 p.m., but if required by charterers, loading to commence at once, such time used to count as hire" - Delivery of vessel on Apr. 13, 1937, loading being commenced on same day-No notice of readiness given until Apr. 15-Tender of hire on Apr. 15 - Refused by owners, who claimed to withdraw vessel from service - Charterers not informed by

owners of vessel's actual deadweight- Award in favour of charterers that owners were not entitled to withdraw vessel.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 331

NORTH BRITISH RUBBER COMPANY, LTD. v. CHEETHAM.

Marine insurance-Practice-Affidavit of ship's papers-Policy taken out by plaintiffs with defendant underwriter upon rubber from "Interior French Congo to Leith, via Zenio and/or Bangui. . . . Including any method of transit in the interior of Africa-this may include porterage and/or by lorries or canoes or river boats"-"Warehouse to warehouse" clause-Rubber dispatched by lorry from Zenio to Mobaye -Rubber damaged owing to delay at Mobaye-Claim by plaintiffs under policy - Interlocutories - Appeal by plaintiffs against order of Lewis, J., that they should file affidavit of ship's papers-Rules of the Supreme Court, Order 31, r. 12 A.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 337

THE "BLIZZARD"

Collision-River-Collision in broad daylight between motor vessel Affaric and barge Ava (in tow of tug Blizzard) in River Thames, a short distance above Wandsworth Bridge - Affaric bound down; tug and tow bound up-Flood tide-Affaric, on her proper side of mid-channel, stemming tide above bridge to enable tug and tow to pass through navigable arch-Duty of vessels in such circumstances-Port of London River By-laws, 1914-1934, Rule 33.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 339

THE "CONFIDENZA."

Collision-Fog-Collision between American steamship City of Hamburg and Italian steamship Confidenza in North Sea during foggy weather-City of Hamburg on course of 244 deg. true; Confidenza on course of 71 deg. true- Contact between stem of Confidenza and starboard side of City of Hamburg at angle of 40 deg.-Speeds -Helm action-Duty of vessels in fog.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 343

BRITISH METAL CORPORATION, LTD. v. LUDLOW BROS. (1913), LTD.

Arbitration-Award-Motion to set aside -Alleged misconduct of arbitrators- Contracts for sale of spelter by claimants to respondents "on customary terms and conditions and subject to the Rules and Regulations of the London Metal Exchange"-First contract providing for delivery "works Lye first half May, 1937"-Second contract providing for delivery "works Birmingham/Lye in buyers' option, May, 1937" -Buyers' delivery instructions awaited by sellers-No instructions given by buyers-Sellers informed by buyers that as deliveries had not been made within period of contracts, they (the buyers) regarded the contracts as cancelled-Right of buyers to cancel in such circumstances-Spelter sold by sellers in open market-Claim by sellers for damages-Award in sellers' favour -Motion by buyers to set aside award on around of technical misconduct of arbitrators upheld by Clauson, J., and Court of Appeal-Second arbitration held-Further award in sellers' favour -Increased damages - Substantial increase in fees and costs of award- Case stated-Motion by buyers to set aside further award-Alleged misconduct of arbitrators (1) in admitting (a) evidence of previous course of business between parties; (b) a letter from sellers' suppliers intimating their ability to deliver sufficient spelter to sellers to enable them to implement their contracts with buyers; (2) in refusing buyers' request for adjournment of hearing of arbitration to enable them to be legally represented -Measure of damages - Substantial increase in fees and costs of award- Whether ground for setting aside award.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 351

IN RE AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN THE OWNERS OF STEAMSHIP "CATALINA" AND OTHERS AND THE OWNERS OF MOTOR VESSEL "NORMA."

Arbitration - Arbitrator - Misconduct - Partiality-Motion for removal of arbitrator-Collision between Portuguese steamship Catalina and Norwegian motor vessel Norma off Ushant -Agreement by parties to arbitrate in England-Appointment of legal arbitrator-Hearing of arbitration- Evidence given by witnesses from each ship-Remarks made by arbitrator during course of hearing suggesting that he held preconceived views as to the general truthfulness of the nationality of witnesses on one side -Motion by owners of Catalina that arbitrator be removed-Jurisdiction of Court to remove arbitrator on ground of misconduct - Arbitration Act, 1889, Sect 11 (1)-Arbitration Act, 1934, Sect. 15.

(1938) 61 Ll.L.Rep. 360

Informa UK Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1072954 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG. VAT GB365462636. Informa UK Limited is part of Informa PLC.

Lloyd's List Group is a trading division of Informa UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1072954 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG. VAT GB365462636. Informa UK Limited is part of Informa PLC. Lloyd's is the registered trademark of the Society incorporated by the Lloyd's Act 1871 by the name of Lloyd's.