Wibau Maschinenfabric Hartman S.A. v Mackinnon Mackenzie & Company (Chanda)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
Date1989
Year1989

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 cases
  • Daewoo Heavy Industries Ltd and Another v Klipriver Shipping Ltd and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 3 April 2003
    ...IV rule 5 to limit his liability for loss or damage to that cargo. Hirst J answered that question in the negative in The Chanda [1989] 2 Lloyds Rep 494; in the present case Langley J has answered the question in the affirmative [2002] EWHC 1306 (Comm), declining to follow The Chanda. 2 The ......
9 books & journal articles
  • The Scope and Application of the Hague and Hague-Visby Rules
    • United Kingdom
    • Oxford University Press Books and Journals Carriage of Goods by Sea (Third Edition) Part III
    • Invalid date
    ...6 of the Hague-​Visby Rules. See below, para 30.03. 158 [1987] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 424 (CA), 430. 159 Wibau Maschinenfabric Hartman SA v Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co (The Chanda) [1989] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 494. 160 ie the cargo hatch nearest the bow of the vessel and most exposed to the 161 West Germany (a......
  • Chapter 11: Exemption of the Seller 1
    • United Kingdom
    • Taylor and Francis Sale of Goods
    • Invalid date
    ...not the purely financial loss which the charterer had suffered through the carrying of a smaller load than anticipated. Cf. The Chanda [1989] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 494. See the George Mitchell case, above at p. 814 per Lord Bridge. In a number of the cases referred to in fn. 54 which appear to sup......
  • Chapter 11: Contractual rights and obligations: The Hague Rules
    • United Kingdom
    • Taylor and Francis Bills of Lading
    • Invalid date
    ...755 The Happy Ranger [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 357, 364, [38]. 756 The Kapitan Petko Voivoda [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 1, overruling The Chanda [1989] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 494. The Happy Ranger [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 357. This was a decision on the Hague-Visby Rules, but applies equally to the Hague Rules......
  • Table of cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Taylor and Francis Bills of Lading
    • Invalid date
    ...Ceval International v Cefetra BV [1996] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 464 7.17 Chadwick, In re, ex parte Catling (1873) 29 L.T. 431 6.32 Chanda, The [1989] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 494 11.353 Chandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller [1951] 1 K.B. 240 11.367, 11.372 Channel Ranger, The See Caresse Navigation Ltd. v Office Nati......
  • Get Started for Free