Docks and Harbours in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Owners of SS. "Hontestroom" v Owners of SS. "Sagaporack."
    • House of Lords
    • 20 Jul 1926

    None the less, not to have seen the witnesses puts appellate judges in a permanent position of disadvantage as against the trial judge, and, unless it can be shown that he has failed to use or has palpably misused his advantage, the higher Court ought not to take the responsibility of reversing conclusions so arrived at, merely on the result of their own comparisons and criticisms of the witnesses and of their own view of the probabilities of the case.

  • Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Procter
    • House of Lords
    • 13 Mar 1923

    In such a case it is the duty of the Court of Appeal to make up its own mind, not disregarding the judgment appealed from and giving special weight to that judgment in cases where the credibility of the witnesses comes into question, but with full liberty to draw its own inference from the facts proved or admitted and to decide accordingly.

    The leading distinction between an invitee and a licensee is that, in the case of the former, invitor and invitee have a common interest, while, in the latter, licensor and licensee have none. The common interest here is that ships in the docks should, when necessary, be able to employ boilermakers on board of them.

  • Ward v Tesco Stores Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 13 Nov 1975

    This case, too, has to be decided on its own facts, to which established principles must be applied. "Where", said Chief Justice Erle, "the thing is shown to be under the management of the defendant or his servants, and the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendant, that the accident arose from want of care."

    Such burden of proof as there is on defendants in such circumstances is evidential, not probative. The trial judge thought that prima facie this accident would not have happened had the defendants taken reasonable care. In my judgment he was justified in taking that view because the probabilities were that the spillage had been on the floor long enough for it to have been cleaned up by a member of the staff.

  • McDermid v Nash Dredging & Reclamation Company Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 02 Jul 1987

    First, an employer owes to his employee a duty to exercise reasonable care to ensure that the system of work provided for him is a safe one. The essential characteristic of the duty is that, if it is not performed, it is no defence for the employer to show that he delegated its performance to a person, whether his servant or not his servant, whom he reasonably believed to be competent to perform it. Despite such delegation the employer is liable for the non-performance of the duty.

  • Compania Naviera Maropan S/A v Bowaters Lloyd Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd (Stork.)
    • Court of Appeal
    • 05 Abr 1955

    But this does not involve, nor in practice would it be reasonable or convenient, that where Charterers have the contractual duty of ordering a ship to go to some place designated safe and where the ship has the contractual duty of obeying the order, the ship must always doubt the validity of the order and must not proceed until, by making some or by seeking information extending beyond that ordinarily available to a reasonable and prudent ship's Master, there has been a satisfactory verification that a place designated safe is in fact so.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • PROFITS IN NON‐MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM 1920‐38*
    • Núm. 10-2, Junio 1963
    • Scottish Journal of Political Economy
    ......(12) Retail distribution (820) (8) Road transport (702-3) (9) Docks, harbours etc. (705) (12) 65.2 75.3 81.8 83.1 90.0 91.2 88-5 ......
  • Industrial Relations in the United Kingdom
    • Núm. 5-3, Noviembre 1967
    • British Journal of Industrial Relations
    ...... would consider them. Labour Relations on the Docks Much progress was made in the plans to end the casual ... licences to employ dock workers under the Docks and Harbours Act, 1966 (see Chronicle, B.J.I.R., Vol. IV, No. 3, November ......
  • A NOTE ON STATUS AND CONTRACT IN BRITISH LABOUR LAW
    • Núm. 30-6, Noviembre 1967
    • The Modern Law Review
    ...... which for decades had been the curse of the docks. Work in the docks is, however, by its nature (‘ casual ’) ... law It does not, however, affect 82 Docks and Harbours Act 1966, 8s. 1-19, based on the Final Report of the ......
  • Policing Plastic
    • Núm. 7-1, Marzo 1999
    • Journal of Financial Crime
    • 67-69
    The adage ‘prevention is better than cure’ has merit in all areas of crime management — after all, most victims of crime would far rather not suffer from it in the first place than see it detected ...
    ...... (the railways), Port Waterways Tunnel and Airport Police (posts, docks and harbours), Atomic Energy Authority Constabulary (nuclear ......
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
  • Marine Navigation Act 2013
    • Mondaq United Kingdom
    ...... have a maritime pilot on board a vessel to enter or traverse some harbours creates an added expense to shipping companies. In some instances, where a ... Special Directions. Section 52 of the Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses Act 1847, usually incorporated into a harbour's local ......
  • Domestic VAT Reverse Charge For Building And Construction Services
    • Mondaq UK
    ......railways, inland waterways, docks and harbours, pipelines,. reservoirs, water mains, wells, sewers, ......
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT