i-law.com

SPRAGGON AND ANOTHER v. DOMINION INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. DOMINION INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. v. TOMRLEY (OR TRUNDLE) AND OTHERS.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 1

Motor insurance - Hirer Driving Policy (Third Party only)-Excluded hirer- Policy issued by insurance company to W. providing indemnity to persons hiring cars from W. who did not come "within the category of excluded hirers"-"No person shall be a hirer within the meaning of this policy until the insured shall have satisfied himself by an actual driving test that the prospective hirer is a qualified, careful and competent driver of motor cars. No person shall be a hirer within the meaning of this policy until he shall have completed a hirer driving proposal form on the form supplied by the company for that purpose. No person shall be a hirer within the meaning of this policy unless he holds a current driving licence which must be the continuation without a break of a driving licence issued at least 12 months prior to the date of the hire and be free from any indorsements. No person shall be a hirer within the meaning of this policy unless immediately on passing the driving test he forwards the completed hirer driving proposal form to the company by registered post"- Proposal form signed by T. (hirer)- Evidence that proposal form was not forwarded to insurance company; that W. took no steps to satisfy himself that T. could drive (beyond the fact that he possessed a driving licence); and that that driving licence had been indorsed -Accident resulting in claims by third parties-Judgment recovered by third parties against T.-Claim by third parties against insurance company- Declaration sought by insurance company that T. was never insured under policy; alternatively, that they were entitled to avoid the policy on the ground of misrepresentation in the proposal form signed by T.-Authority of W. to represent to hirers that they were insured-Road Traffic Act, 1934, Sect. 10.

THE "SAN DEMETRIO."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 5

Salvage - War - Abandonment of ship under orders of master-Return of part of crew as salvors-British tanker San Demetrio, petrol laden, on fire after attack by enemy surface raider in Atlantic Ocean - Vessel abandoned under orders of master, crew leaving in three lifeboats-Vessel, still on fire, boarded by occupants of one lifeboat two days later-Vessel, in critical condition, without wireless, steam steering gear or instruments of navigation - Danger of explosion-Fires extinguished - Heavy weather - Vessel brought in safety 700 miles to Ireland, with most of her cargo intact, services occupying six days-Apportionment of award between salvors-Certificated and uncertificated members of crew.

THE "ORESTES."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 14

Salvage-Stranding on hard sandy bottom -Services rendered by Dutch salvage vessel Donau to motor vessel Orestes ashore off Freetown, Sierra Leone- Vessel ashore three-quarters of her length-Low water-Neap tide-Rise of 712 ft. at high water-Assistance given by Donau in refloating - Serious damage sustained, though vessel aground for only one tide-Nature of service - Position of plaintiffs as professional salvors-Salvage vessel under requisition to British Government.

WATERS v. AMPLEFORTH STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 20

Negligence-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff stevedore engaged in unloading defendants' steamship Ampleforth in River Thames-Winch operated by fellow stevedore to move thwartship beam-Drum released during course of operation, causing beam to swing across vessel out of control, injuring plaintiff -Cause of accident-Whether due to faulty condition of winch - Case pleaded by plaintiff that pins in clutch lever were not properly in place -Preparation of defence on that basis -Case presented to Court that clutch was defective-Application by plaintiff to amend statement of claim - Vessel since lost at sea, with her repair records -Death of ship's engineer-No opportunity for defendants to make further investigation-Onus of proof.

GRIGG v. ELDER DEMPSTER LINES, LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 25

Negligence-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff stevedore engaged in unloading cargo from defendants' motor vessel Henry Stanley-Plaintiff engaged as winchman on starboard electrical winch-Port winch, in charge of H., used for lifting cargo from hold, starboard winch to pull load to side- Slack turns of wire on drum of port winch-Wire unwound on to deck and then rewound, plaintiff assisting in operation-Plaintiff's foot caught by loop of wire-Port winch shut off by H. -Failure of port winch to stop immediately -Plaintiff seriously injured- Evidence of inspection of winches by shipowners - Suggestion that brake control lever jammed, staying in vertical position-Duty of stevedores to inquire into working of winches before use-Onus of proof of negligence.

HARRIS v. POLAND.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 35

Fire insurance - Loss - Banknotes and articles of jewellery put in unlighted grate for safety-Fire lighted by mistake-Loss of and damage to insured property-Right of recovery under policy covering "loss or damage caused by fire"-Meaning of "loss by fire"-Ambiguity-Contra proferentes doctrine.

EPTANISOS S.S. COMPANY, LTD. v. MINISTRY OF SUPPLY.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 43

Charter-party - Freight - Calculation of lump sum freight due-Charter of vessel carrying "7500 tons deadweight cargo, and having 406,000 cubic feet bale capacity guaranteed available for cargo excluding peaks and poop"- Freight to be paid "at and after a lump sum of 130s. per ton on vessel's deadweight cargo capacity as mutually agreed between captain and charterers' agents . . ."-"If the above-mentioned deadweight cargo and cubic capacity be not placed at charterers' disposal, lump sum to be reduced pro rata"- Agreement between captain and charterers' agents that deadweight available for cargo was 7325 tons and that the cubic capacity available for cargo was 375,665 cubic feet bale space -Dispute between parties as to freight due-Award-Case stated.

STOCKHOLMS ENSKILDABANK AKTIEBOLAG v. SCHERING, LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 49

Emergency legislation-Trading with the enemy-Instalment purchase of reichsmarks by German company from Swedish company (plaintiffs) - Agreement to pay in sterling at substantial discount (8s. in the £)-Existence of foreign exchange difficulties making it impossible for German company to discharge sterling obligation-Contract entered into between German company, an English subsidiary company (defendants), an Indian subsidiary company and plaintiffs whereby plaintiffs agreed to place the reichsmarks at the disposal of the German company, the English and Indian companies constituting themselves sureties jointly and severally and agreeing as principals to purchase by instalments the sterling debt incurred by the German company to the plaintiffs-Provision that German company should lose benefit of proportionate part of discount in case of default by English or Indian companies -Further contract between plaintiffs and English and Indian companies whereby the two companies undertook as principals to make certain instalment payments in sterling to plaintiffs in consideration of the assignment by plaintiffs to them, on the occasion of each such payment, of a like sterling amount of plaintiffs' claim against German company-Instalment not paid on due date - Plea by defendant company that payment to plaintiffs under contract would constitute trading with the enemy-Trading with the Enemy Act, 1939, Sect. 1 (2).

HILL AND ANOTHER v. SHORT BROTHERS, LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 57

Shipbuilding Regulations, 1931-Breach of statutory duty-Staging in shipbuilding yard-Collapse of thwart forming part of staging-Riveters killed by fall -Claim by widows against shipbuilders -Duty of shipbuilders under Regulations-"11 (b): All staging shall (i) be securely constructed of sound and substantial material and shall be maintained in such condition as to ensure the safety of all persons employed; (ii) be inspected at regular and frequent intervals by a competent person. (c): All planks intended to be used for staging shall (i) be carefully examined before being taken into use, (ii) be re-examined before they are used again after the stages have been dismantled, by a person qualified to detect faults in timber."

LUIS DE RIDDER LIMITADA v. ANDRE & CO., S.A., LAUSANNE.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 60

Sale of goods (c.i.f.)-Rejection of documents by buyers-Sale of parcel of maize to A. & Co. (Lausanne)-London Corn Trade Association Contract, No. 41-Appropriation clause-Clause superimposed that all tenders, notices, etc., were to be made to buyers' Antwerp office, that documents were to be presented and payment was to be made against documents in Antwerp-Occupation of Antwerp by Germans, making impossible compliance with clause-Notice of appropriation given to A. & Co. (Lausanne)- Refusal by buyers to accept notice- Arbitration - Case stated - Questions for opinion of Court: (1) Whether the contract was cancelled prior to date of tender by virtue of prohibition clause in Contract No. 41; (2) Whether there was a valid notice of appropriation by the sellers which the buyers were bound to accept-Award that buyers were not entitled to reject.

GUTTERIDGE v. FREDERICK LEYLAND & CO., LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 63

Master and servant-Safe system of working-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff dock labourer engaged in loading defendants' steamship in Royal Albert Dock-Plaintiff in employ of subsidiary company of shipowners- Vessel being loaded with iron pipes- Pipes too long to be loaded horizontally -Single sling method used-Fall of pipe from sling, injuring plaintiff -Proper method of loading involving use of double sling-Whether defendants failed in their duty to provide an adequate system with proper supervision, in that they allowed the single sling method to be adopted- Duty of defendants-Casual departure from system of working-Negligence of fellow servant in his duty of supervision.

DEACON v. BORRADAILE.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 69

Contract-Hire of camera-Loss during hire-Measure of damages-Hire by defendant of plaintiff's camera-Intention to take pictures in Holland- Dispute as to whether it was a term of contract that camera should be taken to Holland by air-Carriage of camera by air refused by air carriers-Camera lost by enemy action during sea transit - Camera insured by plaintiff at defendant's expense against "All risks."

SIGALAS v. SCHWEIZERISCHE REDERI A.G.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 75

Practice-Writ-Service out of jurisdiction -Place of trial-Forum conveniens- English charter of Greek vessel by Swiss company-Hire to be paid in London-London arbitration clause- Claim by owners for hire-Appeal by charterers against order of Hallett, J., affirming Master Jelf, granting service of writ out of jurisdiction-R.S.C., Order 11, r. 1 (e).

IOSSIFOGLU v. COUMANTAROS AND OTHERS.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 77

Arbitration - Appointment of umpire - Disagreement between arbitrators- Contract for sale of shares in steamer- Clause providing for arbitration in case of dispute-"In case the arbitrators . . . disagree they shall appoint an umpire"-Appointment of arbitrators -Refusal by arbitrator to meet co-arbitrator, on ground that the arbitration should await the result of proceedings taken by the parties in the Greek Courts, in which the validity of the contract was being considered- Appeal by plaintiff against decision of Cassels, J., refusing to appoint an umpire-Time when arbitrators enter upon reference-Arbitration Act, 1889, Sect. 5.

THE "EURYMEDON."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 79

DUNCAN v. CAMMELL LAIRD & CO., LTD., AND OTHERS. CRAVEN v. CAMMELL LAIRD & CO., LTD., AND OTHERS. [H.M. SUBMARINE "THETIS."]

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 84

Practice - Discovery of documents - Privilege-Public interest-Claim by dependants of deceased members of crew of submarine Thetis sunk during trials-Action brought against shipbuilders and others-Objection by shipbuilders to produce documents- Affidavit by Minister of Crown that disclosure would be against public interest-Practice of Court in such circumstances-Appeal against order of Hilbery, J., upholding objection- R.S.C., Order 31, rr. 14, 19 A (2).

THE "SUNTRAP" AND THE "EVELENE BRODSTONE."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 90

Collision-River-Collision in Lower Pool, River Thames, between barges in tow of tug Evelene Brodstone, bound up, and steamship Suntrap, bound down- Contact between stem of Suntrap and barges on port side in second and third ranks, damaging them and breaking them adrift - Flood tide - Misty weather - Dispute as to place of collision-Whether to north or south of mid-channel-Whether tug and tow proceeding up river at excessive speed -Starboarding by tug to avoid collision -Speed of six knots maintained.

FIBROSA SOC. ANON. v. FAIRBAIRN LAWSON COMBE BARBOUR, LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 97

Contract-Frustration-Sale of machinery in July, 1939, by defendants (English company) to plaintiffs (Lithuanian company)-Machinery to be delivered c.i.f. Polish port-Poland occupied by Germans in September, 1939-Sellers informed by buyers that they were willing to take substituted delivery at Riga or Leeds-Contract repudiated by sellers-£1000 (part of purchase price) paid by buyers before repudiation-Clause 7 of contract providing that "Should the despatch be hindered or delayed . . . by any cause whatsoever beyond our reasonable control, including . . . war . . . a reasonable extension of time shall be granted"-Claim by buyers for damages for breach of contract; alternatively, for specific performance- Whether buyers entitled to waive mode of delivery-Passing of property -Right of buyers to return of £1000 paid-Trading with the Enemy Act, 1939.

MAY & HASSELL, LTD. v. VSESOJUZNOJE OBJEDINENIJE "EXPORTLES."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 102

Sale of goods (c.i.f.)-Breach by sellers- Defective shipments under instalment contract - Quality or condition - Arbitration-Jurisdiction of arbitrators -Sale of Kara Sea redwood, Archangel bracking-"Goods to bear shippers' usual marks"-"Buyers shall not reject the goods herein specified but shall accept or pay for them in terms of contract against shipping documents"-Amendment to English arbitration clause providing 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" should be arbitrated upon in Moscow-Shipments of part of goods improperly marked-Claim by buyers for damages -Arbitration-Case stated-Question for opinion of Court: Whether buyers entitled to claim damages-Case never set down-Damages paid by sellers- Further claim by buyers for damages, calculated upon undelivered balance, it being alleged by the buyers that the sellers, by reason of their defective shipments, had repudiated the contract -Further arbitration-Whether claim within jurisdiction of English arbitrators.

THE "LIMA."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 111

Collision - Convoy - Collision between Swedish motor vessel Lima, second in port column of northward-bound convoy, and Norwegian motor vessel Sofie Bakke, southward bound on course crossing convoy at angle of about 10 deg.-Contact between stem of Lima and port side of Sofie Bakke at angle of 80 deg. leading forward- Sofie Bakke sunk-Attempt by Sofie Bakke by hard-a-starboard helm action to pass under stern of port column leader-Porting by Lima.

MITSUI & CO., LTD. v. HUMPHREY SHATWELL & CO. (SILK THROWSTERS), LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 119

Sale of goods (c.i.f.)-Payment-Documents not tendered by sellers-Waiver -Sale by plaintiffs to defendants of 50 bales of silk, shipment March/April/May 1940, at the price of 21s. 6d. per lb. c.i.f. London and/or any other port in the United Kingdom at sellers' option-Defendants informed by plaintiffs' agents of separate shipments by different vessels-Parcels entered and cleared by plaintiffs at defendants' request and put into warehouse-Defendants informed by plaintiffs that on being paid they would forward delivery orders entitling defendants to obtain possession-10 bales paid for by defendants -Only 40 bales delivered by plaintiffs -Failure by defendants to make any further payment - Defendants' contention that plaintiffs had failed to procure or tender the proper shipping documents relative to the 50 bales -Goods sold by plaintiffs as unpaid vendors-Claim by plaintiffs for damages (including warehousing charges, etc.).

NISSHO COMPANY, LTD. v. N. G. LIVANOS.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 125

Charter-party-Breach-Measure of damages -Failure by shipowner to tender chartered vessel - Substitute vessel not procurable-Charter by claimants of respondent's vessel to load cargo of salt at Port Sudan for Japan-Nomination by respondent of steamship E.L. to fulfil charter-E.L. nominated by claimants to buyers-Japanese importation permit obtained - E.L. not tendered by respondent - Permit refused by Japanese authorities in respect of substitute vessel offered by respondent - Admitted breach of charter by respondent - Claim by charterers for damages-Arbitration- Consultative case for opinion of Court.

TATEM STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY, LTD. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND REVENUE.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 132

Revenue-Super tax-"Company in which the public are substantially interested" -Shipping company under control of not more than five persons-Gift of shares by principal shareholder to niece as an accretion to her marriage settlement funds-Principal shareholder a trustee of the marriage settlement- Provisions of Sect. 21 of Finance Act, 1922, applicable to company under the control of not more than five persons and which is not a company in which the public are substantially interested - "A company shall be deemed to be a company in which the public are substantially interested if shares of the company . . . carrying not less than 25 per cent. of the voting power have been allotted unconditionally to, or acquired unconditionally by, and are at the end of the year or other period for which the accounts of the company have been made up as aforesaid beneficially held by, the public . . . and any such shares have in the course of such year or other period been the subject of dealings on a stock exchange in the United Kingdom and the shares have been quoted in the official list of such a stock exchange"-Evidence of quotation of shares on stock exchange-Whether niece a member of public-Meaning of "public"- Unconditional allotment - Finance Act, 1922, Sect. 21 (6), as amended by Finance Act, 1927, Sect. 31 (3).

BAKUBHAI & AMBALAL, LTD. v. SOUTH AUSTRALIAN FARMERS' CO-OPERATIVE UNION, LTD., OF ADELAIDE.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 138

Contract - Frustration - Impossibility of performance-Prohibition of export- Pre-war sale of 7000 tons of South Australian wheat, cargo to be shipped to one safe port in Kathiawar to be declared on loading-Vessel chartered by sellers for carriage of wheat to wide range of ports-Provision in contract for cancellation in case of prohibition of export-Charter-party conditions also to apply, Clause 28 providing: "If the nation under whose flag the vessel sails shall be at war whereby the free navigation of the vessel is endangered, or in case of blockade of or prohibition of export from the loading port, this charter 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"-Outbreak of war before cargo loaded-Necessity for Board of Trade licence for voyage- Applications by shipowners for licence refused-Cancellation of charter-party by shipowners-Cancellation of contract by sellers-Cargo resold by sellers to other buyers-Evidence of efforts made to obtain licence-Duty of sellers.

WILKINSON v. REA, LTD., AND OTHERS.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 147

Shipbuilding Regulations, 1931-Breach of statutory duty-Occupier of public dry dock-Lighting-Common law negligence - Contributory negligence - Plaintiff employed by B. Ltd. engaged on repair work to motor vessel belonging to L. & H. Ltd.-R. Ltd. bunkering vessel, hatch cover being removed for such purpose-Lights temporarily extinguished for purpose of Board of Trade survey-Plaintiff's fall down unlighted bunker hatch, in spite of warning given by foreman in charge of bunkering operations-Personal injuries sustained - Action brought against R. Ltd., B. Ltd. and L. & H. Ltd.-Judgment entered by Stable, J., for plaintiff against R. Ltd. with costs -Claim against B. Ltd. and L. & H. Ltd. dismissed, these defendants' costs to be borne by plaintiff-Appeal by R. Ltd.-Cross-appeal by plaintiff on question of liability of B. Ltd. and L. & H. Ltd. and costs-Respective duties under regulations-Meaning of "occupier"-Regulations 42 (a), (b).

GUTTERIDGE v. FREDERICK LEYLAND & CO., LTD.

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 157

Master and servant-Safe system of working-Personal injuries sustained by plaintiff dock labourer engaged in loading defendants' steamship in Royal Albert Dock-Plaintiff in employ of subsidiary company of shipowners- Vessel being loaded with iron pipes- Pipes too long to be loaded horizontally -Single sling method used-Fall of pipe from sling, injuring plaintiff -Proper method of loading involving use of double sling-Whether defendants failed in their duty to provide an adequate system with proper supervision, in that they allowed the single sling method to be adopted- Duty of defendants-Casual departure from system of working-Negligence of fellow servant in his duty of supervision.

THE "DOMBY."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 161

Salvage-Grounding in river-Services rendered by tugs Margaret Ham, Cardiffian and Nora to steamship Domby in Cardiff entrance channel- Domby manoeuvring in channel preparatory to entering dock-Margaret Ham and Cardiffian employed under contract-Assistance of Nora requested by pilot of Domby-Domby taken under control by tugs into dock-Plaintiffs' plea that Domby had grounded- Nature of service-Unexpected incidents in course of tow.

THE "MARI CHANDRIS."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 166

Salvage - War - Services rendered by British steamship Algerian to Greek steamship Mari Chandris in English Channel - Mari Chandris seriously damaged by collision-Taken in tow by Algerian and towed 45 miles towards port, towage occupying 17 hours-Tow taken over by salvage tug Zwarte Zee -Zwarte Zee awarded £5000-Risk from enemy action-Loss of gear.

THE "CONTRACTOR."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 170

Collision-Port to port passing-Seamanship -Collision in broad daylight in Thames Estuary between steamships Girasol and Contractor-Girasol inward bound; Contractor (in convoy) outward bound-Contractor following steamship G. (convoy leader)-Starboard helm action by G. to pass first a Finnish vessel and then the Girasol- Starboard helm action by Girasol, vessels passing in safety port to port- Duty of Contractor-Starboarding by Contractor on becoming aware of Girasol-Contact between stem of Contractor and port side of Girasol about amidships - Girasol sunk - Whether Contractor hampered in her manoeuvres by presence of wreck and buoy-Look-out-Helm action.

THE "CHARLES LIVINGSTON."

(1941) 69 Ll L Rep 180

Limitation of liability-Actual fault or privity-Life claims-Loss of pilot boat belonging to Mersey Docks and Harbour Board-Admittedly due to improper navigation-No certificated master on board-Whether pilot boat a "home-trade passenger ship" - Appointments of first-class pilots as masters - Alleged incompetence of second master-Whether appointment of pilot as second master justified, bearing in mind the Harbour Board's knowledge of his career-Pilot boat not equipped with grab-lines or grab-battens -Alleged lack of line-throwing apparatus-Undermanning- Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, Sects. 92, 267, 503, 742 - Life-Saving Appliances Order, 1938, rr. 33, 45-Liverpool Pilotage Order, 1920.

Lloyd's Law Reports