TWO-FIFTHS GUILTY

Taranaki Daily News, 21 December 1929, Page 11

TWO-FIFTHS GUILTY

THE GREYCLIFFE DISASTER JUDGE ASSESSES THE BLAME. UNION COMPANY MUST PAY. By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. Rec. 9.55 p.m. Sydney, Dec. 20. Mr. Justice Haise Rogers delivered judgment in the Admiralty Court to-day in the £30,000 claim by the Sydney Ferries, Ltd., against the Union Steam Ship Company, owners of the Tahiti, for the loss of the ferry steamer Greycliffe on November 3, 1927, in Sydney harbour. He held that both vessels were guilty of negligence.' He apportioned the negligence in the ratio of three-fifths against the Greycliffe and two-fifths against the Tahiti, and held the plaintiffs were entitled to recover twofifths of. their loss. His Honour said, that both the Greycliffe and the Tahiti were guilty of negligence, the Tahiti by reason of excessive speed and omission to warn the Greycliffe of her approach, and the Greycliffe because she made an unexpected and unnecessary turn to port without her master looking to see whether there was any ship Close behind and without giving any warning of her turn. Since, however, there would have been no actual collision but for the turn of the Greycliffe—although the Tahiti would have passed uncomfortably close to her—slightly' greater negligence was found against the Greycliffe than against the Tahiti. The Judge found that at all relevant times the Tahiti was compulsorily in charge of a pilot, that all orders given by the jpilot were promptly obeyed, that the master of the Tahiti was in as favourable a position as the pilot to determine whether any risk of navigation was being incurred, that there was no interference with the pilot and no warning as to excessive speed or the possibility of danger. The judge found that the defence of compulsory pilotage was not made out. ■On the contrary, he held that the master of the Tahiti should have warned the pilot of the danger arising from excessive speed. Thia was a case where the master should have made sure the pilot not only saw what was gong on but appreciated the position. He allowed the pilot to take his own course without question and without warning, and therefore the Tahiti was not entitled to the immunity claimed for her under this defence. His Honour found on the question of damage that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover two-fifths of their loss. The judgment is to date from the first day of the next law term.