The Parana
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 March 1877 |
| Date | 27 March 1877 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
Court of Appeal
James, Mellish, and Baggallay, L.JJ.
The Parana
Simpson v. London and North-Western Railway Company L. Rep. 1 Q. B. 274 33 L. T. Rep. N. S. 805
Horne v. Midland Railway Company L. Rep. 8 C. P. 131, 137 28 L. T. Rep. N. S. 312
Collard v. South-Eastern Railway CompanyENR 7 H. & N. 79 4 L. T. Rep. N. S. 710
Hadley v. BaxendaleENR 9 Ex. 343
Smeed v. FordENR 1 El. & El. 602
Ward v. New York Central Railway CompanyUNK 47 N. Y. 79
Damages and cargo 24 Vict. c. 10 Measure of damages
Decision of the court below reversed
MARITIME LAW CASES. 399 CT. OF APP.] THE PARANA. [CT. OF APP. March 9 and 27,1877. (Before James, Mellish, and Baggaltay, L.JJ.) ON APPEAL FROM THE PROBATE, DIVORCE, AND ADMIRALTY DIVISION (ADMIRALTY). THE Parana, Damages and cargo-24 Vict. c. 10- Measure of damages-Fall in price-Loss of market. Where, through the negligence of a carrier by sea, goods carried by him are not delivered in a reasonable time, the owner of the goods or assignee of the bill of lading for the goods is not entitled to recover, as damages from the shipowner, the difference between the market value of the goods when they ought to have been delivered and the market value when they actually were delivered. Decision of the court below reversed. Semble, the measure of damages recoverable in such a case is interest at the ordinary commercial rate on the value of the goods for the period of the delay in delivery. This was an appeal from the decision of the judge of the Admiralty Division, in which he sustained an objection to the report of the registrar of that court, assisted by merchants, and held that when undue delay in the prosecution ofa voyage has taken place, the shipowner is liable 400 MARITIME LAW CASES. CT. OF APP.] THE PARANA. [CT. OF APP. to the consignee of goods for a fall in price of the goods between the time at which they ought; to have arrived and the time at which they actually did arrive. The facts, arguments, and judgment in the court below are fully reported, ante, p. 220. Wa??kin Williams, Q.C. and Cohen, Q.C. (with them G. Bruce), for appellants. To enable the plaintiffs to recover they must show that the loss - was sustained by the fall in the price of hemp was either a matter which at the time of making the contract the defendants knew, or that they had notice of some other contract contingent on the fulfilment of this one by a certain date. They are entitled to recover, as found by the registrar, the interest on the value of the cargo during the time they were kept out of possession of it, but nothing more; that represents the reasonable profit they might be expected to make, and which might be supposed to be in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made: (Smeed v. Foord, 1 El. & El. 602.) There, although there were special circumstances which might possibly have led the defendant to contemplate a fall in the market price, it was held that a fall which actually did occur could not be recovered, and the rule laid down in Hadley v. Baxendale (9 Ex. 341) is approved. If the fall of the market was the actual consequence of the delay, as, for example, in the case of a cargo of ice to arrive in the summer season and delayed beyond, such a fall might, perhaps, be recovered ; but it is not alleged that there is any regular fluctuation in the price of hemp. The time of arrival from a long voyage like this must be, in any case, a matter of uncertainty, and the margin of uncertainty was at least equal to the thirty-seven days delay which actually took place. In Fletcher v. Tayleur (17 C. B. 21, 29), Wills, J. says : " No matter what the amount of inconvenience sustained by the plaintiffs in the case of nonpayment of money, the measure of damages is the interest of the money only, and it might be a convenient rule if, as suggested by my Lord, the measure of damages in such a case as this was held by analogy to be the average profit made;" that is, the usual commercial rate of interest on the value of the hemp, which the Registrar allowed. In Cory v. Thames Ironworks and Ship Building Company (Limited) (L. Rep. 3 Q. B. 181; 17 L. T. Rep.'N. S. 495), a sort of rough estimated rental value for the chattel, a ship of peculiar construction, was allowed, and not the actual loss sustained by the purchaser through the non-delivery of her; and in British Columbia Saw Mill Company v. Nettleship (L. Rep. 3 C. P. 499, 507; 18 L. T. Rep. N. S. 291, 604; 3 Mar. Law Cas. O. S. 65) it was held that special damages sustained by the non-delivery of a chattel could not be recovered. Bovill, C.J; says: " It is difficult to see the proper way of compensating the plaintiffs for the damage they have suffered...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Czarnikow Ltd v Koufos (Heron II)
...but denies that fall in market value can be taken into account in assessing damages in this case. 4 McNair J., following the decision in The Parana L.R. 2 P.D. 118 , decided this question in favour of the Appellant. He said: "In those circumstances it seems to me almost impossible to say t......
-
Czarnikow Ltd v Koufos (Heron II)
...of a steamer carrying a cargo of sugar to be sold on or through the market"; (paragraph 20 (B)). 5 After referring to the decision of The Parana (1877 2 probate page 118) and reading the most relevant extract from the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Lords Justices James, Mellish and Baggal......
- The Notting Hill
- Australian Coastal Shipping Commission v Green
-
The Achilleas: Custom and Practice or Foreseeability?
...the coin, Lord Diplock in the Heron II gave an example of non-liability for foreseeable damage. This was the old rule in the Parana,2626(1877) 2 PD 118. which limited the damages for late delivery under a contract for carriage of goods by sea to interest on the value of the cargo and disall......