William Holyman and Sons Pty Ltd v Foy and Gibson Pty Ltd [1945] HCA 40

William Holyman and Sons Pty Ltd v Foy and Gibson Pty Ltd [1945] HCA 40

Clause 14 of the bill of lading, purporting to limit liability to £5 per package unless a higher value is declared, is inconsistent with article IV, rule 5 of the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act 1924, which prohibits limitation of carrier liability below £100 per package except as provided in the rules. Therefore, the clause is void and the carrier is not entitled to avail itself of the £5 limitation. The shipper may recover the actual value of the goods subject to the statutory cap if applicable.

Parties
Appellant, Defendant: William Holyman & Sons Proprietary Limited; Respondent, Plaintiff: Foy & Gibson Proprietary Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of Victoria (martin J.) by Special Leave to the High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sea Carriage of Goods, Limitation of Liability, Bills of Lading, Statutory Inconsistency, Damages for Non Delivery
Shipping Law Contract Law Statutory Interpretation Sea Carriage of Goods Limitation of Liability Bills of Lading Statutory Inconsistency Damages for Non Delivery

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Holyman & Sons Proprietary Limited

Appellant, Defendant

Foy & Gibson Proprietary Limited

Respondent, Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of Victoria (martin J.) by Special Leave to the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 14 of the bill of lading, which limited the carrier's liability to £5 per package unless a higher value was declared, is void as being inconsistent with the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act 1924, specifically article IV, rule 5 of the schedule
  2. 2 Whether the carrier can limit liability below £100 per package in the absence of a declaration of value under the Act

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 14 of the bill of lading, purporting to limit liability to £5 per package unless a higher value is declared, is inconsistent with article IV, rule 5 of the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act 1924, which prohibits limitation of carrier liability below £100 per package except as provided in the rules. Therefore, the clause is void and the carrier is not entitled to avail itself of the £5 limitation. The shipper may recover the actual value of the goods subject to the statutory cap if applicable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff for the value of the goods (£57 12s. 7d.)
  • Appellant to pay the costs of the appeal