Langlands & Sons v. M'Master & Co. [1907] ScotLR 805 (27 June 1907)

Langlands & Sons v. M'Master & Co. [1907] ScotLR 805 (27 June 1907)

The shipowners were not liable for the deficiency in the goods as their responsibility ended upon delivery of the goods on the quay at Dundee. The evidence established that all goods received at Liverpool were delivered at Dundee, and any loss likely occurred after delivery, at which point the goods were at the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 805
Parties
Pursuer: Langlands & Sons; Defender: D. M'Master & Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 June 1907
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, First Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decree for pursuers (Langlands & Sons) for unpaid freight; defenders' (M'Master & Co.) counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Carriage of Goods by Sea, Liability for Loss of Goods, Delivery of Cargo, Freight Charges, Risk and Responsibility in Shipping Contracts
Shipping Law Contract Law Carriage of Goods by Sea Liability for Loss of Goods Delivery of Cargo Freight Charges Risk and Responsibility in Shipping Contracts

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 Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Langlands & Sons

Pursuer

D. M'Master & Company

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the shipowners are liable for a deficiency in the quantity of goods delivered at destination compared to the quantity shipped
  2. 2 Whether delivery on the quay constitutes completion of the carrier's obligation
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a tally or receipt at delivery affects liability

Ratio Decidendi

The shipowners were not liable for the deficiency in the goods as their responsibility ended upon delivery of the goods on the quay at Dundee. The evidence established that all goods received at Liverpool were delivered at Dundee, and any loss likely occurred after delivery, at which point the goods were at the owner's risk.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decree for pursuers (Langlands & Sons) for unpaid freight; defenders' (M'Master & Co.) counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Recal findings in fact and law of Sheriff; find pursuers performed contract and are not liable for deficiency; decern for payment of unpaid freight; dismiss defenders' counterclaim; affirm interlocutor of Sheriff quoad ultra; find pursuers entitled to expenses of appeal and remit to Auditor to tax.