Furness, Withy & Co. v. Ahlin

Furness, Withy & Co. v. Ahlin

The appellants failed to prove they exercised reasonable care as bailees by adequately inspecting and renewing worm‑eaten piles (no competent diver evidence and piles had outlived their expected life), so their negligence caused the wharf collapse and they are liable for the loss of warehoused goods.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
(1918) 56 SCR 553
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Furness, Withy and Company; Defendant/respondent: Karl A. Ahlin
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 June 1918
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (bailment/warehouse) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia affirmed
Legal Topics
Bailee for Hire, Warehouseman Liability, Negligence, Inspection and Maintenance of Wharves, Wharfage and Salvage
Source Language
english
Torts Commercial Law Property Law Maritime Law Contract Law Bailee for Hire Warehouseman Liability Negligence +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Furness, Withy and Company

Plaintiff/appellant

Karl A. Ahlin

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (bailment/warehouse) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the wharfinger/warehouseman exercised reasonable care as a bailee for hire
  2. 2 Whether collapse of wharf was inevitable or caused by negligent failure to inspect/renew piles
  3. 3 Whether absence of proof about inspection/diver permits inference of negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants failed to prove they exercised reasonable care as bailees by adequately inspecting and renewing worm‑eaten piles (no competent diver evidence and piles had outlived their expected life), so their negligence caused the wharf collapse and they are liable for the loss of warehoused goods.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (51 N.S. Rep. 291; 35 D.L.R. 150) affirmed