Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SHIPPING CASE.

ACTION AGAINST THE SHAW SAVILL COMPANY.

[BY TELEGRAPH.— ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, Saturday. In the S.M. Court to-day Messrs. Dutbie and Company claimed £64 10s from the Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company in respect to a number of sash-weights consigned to the plaintiffs going astray, and others being substituted. In giving judgment the Magistrate said none of the bills j of lading contained any statement or admission of the weights of the sash-weights shipped, while the marking of these sash- , weights by coloured paint seemed to have been very imperfectly done. This brought the case well within the spirit of exception in the bill of lading as to the proper marking of packages. The case was alio within the exception of "weight measurement, quality, and value unknown," and likewise that relating to unprotected goods, as regards liability for breakage. The plaintiffs must prove that the very goods for which they claimed were actually shipped. They must prove the weights, and prove actual neglect. No adequate evidence on these heads was, however, forthcoming; especially was there no proof of negligence. On the contrary, it was shown that on each occasion the sash weights for Duthie and Co. were placed by themselves in one of the holds, and each consignee's sash weights stacked separately on the Wellington wharf' on arrival. If, however, owing to the paint marks getting rubbed off, in consequence of the unprotected state of the sash weights, sish weights belonging to different owners became accidentally mixed, in spite of the precaution taken to avoid this, the proper course was pointed out by Carver (page 505). Delivery through the Harbour Board was objected to, but the goods were delivered according to the eustem of the port, and this was sufficient (vide Carver, page 468). Judgment would go for the defendants, with costs.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH18970628.2.24

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10480, 28 June 1897, Page 5

Word Count
302

SHIPPING CASE. New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10480, 28 June 1897, Page 5

SHIPPING CASE. New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10480, 28 June 1897, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert