Gibbs and Others v the Trustees of the Liverpool Docks

[439] gibbs and others z the trustees of the liverpool docks. Nov. 10, 1856-The trustees of the Liveipool Docks are a corporation receiving tolls and port duties, for the purpose of discharging a public duty, from which the members derive no emolument, and they have a discretion as to the application of their funds, and as to the time and manner in which they will repair the docks. -By 6 Geo 4, c clxxxvn. ss .'?, 4, it is provided that, in order to carry into execution the powers of the Liverpool Dock Acts a committee is to be appointed, twelve nominated by the corporation and eight by the merchants of Liverpool; and that the committee or any seven of them, including the chairman, who has the custody of the common seal of the trustees, should have, use, and exercise exclusively all and every the powers and authorities in lelation to the execution and carrying into effect the several powers of the Liverpool Dock Acts, vested in the trustees by virtue of those Acts, subject to a power of veto in the trustees Held, first, that though the trustees possessed hiithcient funds to enable them to keep the docks in a proper condition, they were not responsible to the owners of a vessel injured by grounding on an accumulation of mud suffered to remain in the docks-Secondly, that the trustees ate not liable to an action for a neglect of duty by the committee. [8. C. 26 L J. Ex. 109 , 5 W. fi. 74 . reversed, 1834, 3 H & N 164 in House of Lords, 1864, 11 H. L. C. 686 ; L R 1 H L. 93 ; 11 E. R. 1500.] The declaration stated, that before and at the time of the committing of the grievances, &c., the plaintiff's were the owners of a cargo of guano, then on board a ship called the "Sierra Nevada," which ship had arrived at the port of Liverpool from parts beyond the seas with the said cargo, and was then lawfully navigating in the said port, and the defendants long before and at the same time were the owners of a certain dock in the said port of Liverpool, called the Wellington Dock, made and constructed by the said trustees under the powers of a, certain Act (7 & 8 Viet c Ixxx ), and of the several Acts incorporated therewith; and under and by virtue of the said Acts, before and at the time of the committing the said grievances, were and still are entitled to receive, and did receive, divers port duties, &c, from and in respect of vessels navigating in the said port and otherwise, which said port duties, &c., the 1274 GIBBS V. THE TRUSTEES OP THE LIVERPOOL DOCKS 1 H. & N 440 defendants were, under and by virtue of the said Acts, to apply and dispose of, and it was their duty under the same Acts to apply and dispose in and about, amongst otler things, the maintaining, cleansing, supporting and preserving the said dock, to wit, so as to be in a fit state for vessels entering into and navigating the same, nevertheless, although before and at the time of the committing the said [440] grievances, the sums of money and funds in the hands of the defendants, arising from and produced by the said duties, rates and charges, were fully sufficient and adequate for the maintaining, cleansing, supporting and preserving the said duck as aforesaid, in addition to the satisfaction and discharge of all other charges, liabilities, and incum-brances in and about the same, of all which the defendants, before and at the time of the committing the said grievances, had notice ; yet the defendants neglected their duty, and did not take due and reasonable or any care, in 01 about the maintaining, cleansing, supporting or preserving the said dock, insomuch that the said vessel, in duly endeavouring to enter into and navigate the said dock, struck against and became embedded in a large bank or mass of mud, lemaming, by and through the negligence of the defendants, in and about the entrance to the said dock, and in consequence thereof was damaged, and water and mud entered the same and damaged the said guano. And the defendants also neglected their duty in this, that well knowing that the said Wellington Dock and the entrance thereto were, by reason of certain great accumulations of mud therein, in an unfit state to be navigated and used by vessels then used and accustomed to navigate and use the same, they did not take due and reasonable care or any care to put the same into a fit state foi that purpose ; but on the contrary thereof, negligently suffeied and peimitted the said dock and the entiance thereto to be and continue \\hile the same was, as they well knew, and by their pei-mission, navigated and used by such vessels, in an unfit state to be so navigated and used for want of necessary and reasonable cleansing, insomuch that the said vessel being such vessel as was used and accustomed to navigate and use the said dock, in endeavouring to enter into and navigate the same, struck against and became embedded in the last mentioned accumulations of mud, and by reason [441] theieof mud and water entered the same and damaged the said guano Demurrer and joinder therein. Quain (with whom was Hugh Hill), argued in support of the demurrei in last Easter Term (April 30). The defendants are trustees under an act of parliament, acting in...