Gregory v The West Midland Railway Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 January 1864 |
| Date | 22 January 1864 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 159 E.R. 391
IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 33 L J. Ex 155, 10 Jur (N. S.) 243; 12 W. R. 528.
gregory v. the west midland railway company. Jan 14, 2-2, 1864 -The owner of cattle, on sending them by a railway, signed a ticket stating that he theieby agreed to the following conditions of carriage -" 1st The Company are to be free from all nsk and responsibility with respect to any loss or damage arising in the loading or unloading, from suffocation or from being trampled upon, bruised or otherwise injured in the transit, from tire, or from any other cause whatsoever, it being hereby agreed that the same is to be carried at the owner's risk." " 3rd. That, as the charge for conveyance is for the use of the waggon and locomotive power, the owner or his representative is lequired to see to the efficiency of such waggon before he allows his stock to be placed theiein, and complaint must be made in writing to the station-inspector or clerk in charge as to all alleged defects, either at the time of booking or before the waggon leaves the station." Held, that these conditions were unreasonable, and void under the Railway Canal and Traffic Act, 1854. [S. C. 33 L J. Ex 155 , 10 Jur (N. S.) 243; 12 W. R. 528.J The first count of the declaration stated that the defendants were the owners and proprietors of the West Midland Railway, and of certain trucks and carriages used by them to cany cattle thereon for hire and reward, and the plamtitt delivered to the defendants, at their request, a cow, to be [945] by them safely and securely earned in the said trucks from Abergavenny to Newport, for reasonable leward in that behalf; and it became the duty of the defendants to use due and proper care and skill in and about the carnage of the cow on the said journey, and in and about the management of the said trucks: Yfet the defendants so carelessly and unskilfully conducted themselves in and about the carnage of the cow and the management of the trucks, that by reason thereof the cow was greatly injured and deteriorated in value during the said journey. Second count. That the plaintiff employed the defendants, at their request and for hire and reward, to provide for the plaintiff a certain truck or carriage as aforesaid, to be used on the said railway for the conveyance of a cow of the plaintiff from Abergavenny to Newport by the defendants, arid safely and securely to cany the cow thereon from Abergavenny to Newport, and the defendants provided the said truck and received the cow to be carried as aforesaid, and, in consideration of the said employ- 392 GREGORY V. THE WEST MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY 2 H & C 946 mentj promised and undertook that the truck or carriage provided by them should, at the time of their providing the same, be reasonably fit, and proper for the conveyance of the cow on the said railway, and that they would safely and securely carry the cow on the said truck from Abergavenny to Newport Yet the plaintiff avers that, although all things were done, &c., the said truck so provided by the defendants and in which the cow was carried was not, at the time of the defendants providing the same,, reasonably fit or proper for the conveyance of the cow on the said railway, and the defendants did not safely or securely carry the cow in the said truck from Abergavenny to Newport, wheieby the cow, whilst on the journey, was greatly injured. Plea (inter aha) to first count That the cow was dehveied to and was received by the defendants to be carried [946] from Abergavenny to Newport, under a special contract, to wit, between the plaintiff and the defendants, then signed by the person who delivered the cow to the defendants for carnage as aforesaid, whereby the said receipt and carriage thereof were made and were subject to certain just and reasonable conditions, referred to by and embodied in the said contract, that is to say, &c (the plea then set forth the that, third, and fourth conditions (post, p. 947)) and all...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gallagher v Great Western Railway Company
...CompanyENR 10 H. L. C. 513. Glenister v. Great Western Railway CompanyUNK 29 L. T. N. S. 423. Gregory v. West Midland Railway CompanyENR 2 H. & C. 944. Rooth v. North-Eastern Railway CompanyELR L. R. 2 Ex. 173. Lloyd v. Waterford and Limerick Railway CompanyUNK 15 Ir. C. L. R. 37. Harrison ......