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
Article image
Article image

THE TITANIC CASES.

APPEAL- COURT'S JUDGMENT

London, Fob. 10.

In delivering judgment in the Titanic case, the Court ot Appeal held that neither the--directions preceding the contract nor the notice to passengers following the contract wero part and parcel of the contract. Therefore- it wag-Ttnireeessaa-y to-consider whether sufficient notice of the exemption clause had been given to intending passengers. Even if the exemption clause was part and parcel of the contract, it was not in the form prescribed by the Board of Trade.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TC19140212.2.48

Bibliographic details

Colonist, Volume LVI, Issue 13391, 12 February 1914, Page 5

Word Count
83

THE TITANIC CASES. Colonist, Volume LVI, Issue 13391, 12 February 1914, Page 5

THE TITANIC CASES. Colonist, Volume LVI, Issue 13391, 12 February 1914, 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