Notara v Henderson (1872) LR 7 QB 225
Citation:Notara v Henderson (1872) LR 7 QB 225
Rule of thumb:Are ships liable for damages caused to goods whilst at sea? They are not liable for damages caused to the goods by the natural perils of the sea, however, they still have a duty to take preventative & mitigating measures to salvage the goods as far as possible and if they do not do so then they can still be held liable.
Background facts:The facts were that a cargo of beans was delivered in a damaged state due to seawater that had entered the ship in the course of the voyage. The beans had been soaked with water when the vessel was involved in a collision. The ship was put into a dock at Liverpool for repairs to it, and it was proved that it would have been best for the captain of the ship to discharge the beans there, so that they could be spread out and dried out in a warehouse or somewhere, and then put back onto the vessel before re-commencing the voyage. If that had been done, much of the damage would have been avoided.
Parties argued:The bill of lading created an exception against “loss or damage arising from … accidents of the seas”, the scope of which was in dispute.
Judgment:The court held that the exception did not protect the carrier from liability for the excess damage that could have been avoided if due care had been shown and the beans had been dried out, ‘In the result it appears to us that the duty of the master, in this respect, is … to take reasonable care of the goods intrusted to him, not merely in doing what is necessary to preserve them on board the ship during the ordinary incidents of the voyage, but also in taking reasonable measures to check and arrest their loss, destruction, or deterioration, by reason of accidents, for the necessary effects of which there is, by reason of the exception in the bill of lading, no original liability. … [T]he exemption is from liability for loss which could not have been avoided by reasonable care, skill, and diligence, and that it is inapplicable to the case of a loss arising from the want of such care, and the sacrifice of the cargo by reason thereof, which is the subject-matter of the present complaint’, Willes J at 235-236
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.