SHORT-LANDED GOODS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9717, 20 July 1917, Page 2

SHORT-LANDED GOODS

SHIPPING COMPANY LOSE CASE. Xieeorvecl judgment was • delivered by Mr W. G. Riddell, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning in a case in which the New Zealand hoan and Mercantile Agency Company, Etd.., claimed from lliuldart-Parker; Ltd., the sum of <£96 15s lOd for goods short-land-ed. Ttie plaintiffs- shipped sixty silks of nitrate of soda in defendants’ steamer at Sydney in December, 1916, and the goods were not delivered at their destination. . . . His 'Worship, in the course . of his judgment, said tho steamer s mil Ct lading showed that the soda had been shipped in good order and condition, and that the defendant company also shipped 1684 sacks of nitrate ot soda, many of the bags of which were in a rotten condition. The parcels were stowed in No. 4 ’tween decks, without any protecting dunnage so that the parcels might be distinguished at the etiu ot tho voyage from each other, with the result that at Wellington, the port of discharge, the marks on the bags ohhW be deciphered. The whole of, the 1694 sacks in the larger consignment were discharged before tho quantity. was made un- It was transhipped by the o.s. Calm for a, firm in. Dunedin, and T 726 parcels were sent forward by the steamer. Owing to broken bags a number of. these were only half-full, and the ilarwour Board officials stated that the quantity sent forward did not amount to more than 1694 sacks, and they never received from the defendant company the 60 sacks consigned to plaintiff. , Defendant s council argued tha-t the loss was duo to insufficient marking on the sacks consigned to plaintiff, that under the hill of lading defendant was free from liability for the obliteration of marks due to causes inherent m the Roods carried, and that defendant s i - SDonsibility ceased as soon as consignment was landed on the wharf at Wellington; and that as all thenitra.o of soda carried by the vessel had been discharged at Wellington, the contract of carriage had been. carried oua Counsel for plaintiff argued that tho was due to defendant’s negligence in the nitrate of soda contained In Sod bags along with another shipment contained in rotten a " d bags, and taking no stens.to see that they could be identified at the end of the V The C ßench held that plaintiff’s loss was j ttft ft> want of care m Alter mlotinjf legal cases His Worship smd hi, doifbtech as both damned from, the vessel without tallying, whether there was suen a delivery to the Harbour Board on behalf o-f plaintiff as would relieve the detondant from liability for shortage. He held that plaintiff was 15s ment for the amount cimmed for A 96 13s Kkl together with costs 3 16»At the hearing Mr M Myers for tho plaintiff, and Mr A. W. Blair for the defendant.