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

WHOSE LIABILITY?

GOODS AT PRIVATE SIDINGS Who is liable when damage or pillage occurs to goods between a ship berthed at a Timaru wharf and a consignee’s private siding? This was a question which was debated at a meeting of the Council of the South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce last night. It was stated that the shipping companies did not accept liability after the goods were loaded into the trucks at the ship’s side and also that the Railway Department did not accept responsibility for the goods during transit from the wharves to the siding. For the Transport Committee, Mr W. I. Tait reported that under the present system, goods were consigned from the ship’s side to sidings entirely at the consignee’s risk as regards tallies, pillage and damage and it was contended that the system placed importers, who used the railway sidings, at a distinct disadvantage in comparison with those whose merchandise was consigned through the goods sheds. It was suggested that representation should be made to the shipping companies in the matter. “When does the consignee take delivery of the goods? Is it at the ship’s side or at the siding?” queried Mr J. M. Jenkins. Opinion was divided, one member saying it was at the ship’s side and another at the siding.

Mr C. J. Williams, stationmaster at Timaru, said the Railway Department was concerned only with the haulage of the trucks from the wharf to the siding and not with the contents. If the use of private sidings was not satisfactory, goods could be put through the goods sheds where an extra charge was made for sorting. Mr H. Gould said the shipping companies claimed that their responsibility ended when the goods left the sling.

Mr G. H. Andrews said that as he saw it, the position was that if goods were loaded into a truck on the wharf and the contents were short when the consignee took delivery at the siding, say in Hay Street, the consignee had no redress.

It was decided to refer the matter back to the Transport Committee for further inquiries from the shipping companies.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THD19371125.2.39

Bibliographic details

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20894, 25 November 1937, Page 6

Word Count
354

WHOSE LIABILITY? Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20894, 25 November 1937, Page 6

WHOSE LIABILITY? Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20894, 25 November 1937, Page 6