NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Rail Equipment Leasing Pty Ltd v CV Scheepvaartonderneming Emmagracht [2008] NSWSC 850
HEARING DATE(S) : 5 August 2008
JUDGMENT DATE : 18 August 2008
JURISDICTION : Admiralty List
JUDGMENT OF : Rein J
DECISION : At [90]
CATCHWORDS : Whether Court had jursidiction on claims in respect of cargo damage caused by allegedly defective lashings - Whether carrier entitled to an order pursuant to s 29(2) of the Admiralty Act - Whether ouster clause in bill of lading effective - Whether arguable case for a contractual lien and claim pursuant to s 4(3)(f) of the Admiralty Act Whether carrier's claim a proceeding on a general maritime claim based on damage claimed to have been caused to the ship by cargo due to alleged defect in packing supplied by freight forwarder - Whether proceeding is "proceeding on a maritime lien" pursuant to s 15 of the Admiralty Act and consideration of whether 'right in rem' available pursuant to s 17 of the Admiralty Act - Consideration of clauses 10(b), 11, 17 of BIMCO Liner bill of lading and Article IV rule 6 of the Hague Visby Rules
Admiralty Act 1988 LEGISLATION CITED : Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1991 Hague Visby Rules
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Pan Australia Shipping v The Comandate No 2 [2006] FCA 112, 234 ALR 483 Comandate Marine Corp v Pan Australia Shipping [2006] FCAFC 192, 238 ALR 457 The Indian Grace No 2 [1998] AC 878 Blanch v British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd (2005) 62 NSWLR 653 Kolback Securities Ltd v Epoch Mining NZ [1987] 8 NSWLR 533 Gould v S E Chatham Railway [1920] 2 KB 186 J L Lucas Machinery v SS Peter Wesch (1984) AMC 196T SDNY 1984 O'Connell Mckinery v Americana 1986 AMC 2122 Heilbrun v Lightwood PLC [2007] FCA 1518 Owners of the Ship "Shin Kobe Maru" v Empire Shipping Co Inc (1994) 181 CLR 404 Samick Lines Co Ltd v Owners of the Antonis P Lemos [1985] AC 711 Gatoil International Inc v Arkwright Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co [1985] 255 Effort Shipping Co Ltd v Linden Management SA The "Giannis" [1998] AC 605 Heath Steel Mines v The Erwin Schroder [1970] Ex CR 426 Union Steamship Co of NZ v Ferguson (1969) 19 CLR 191 CASES CITED : Nagint v The Ship Regis (1939) 611 CLR 668 The William [1871] LR 3 A&E 487 The Flora (1866) LR 1A&E 45 Morgan v Castlegate Steamship Company (The "Castlegate") [1893] AC 28 Wahono v The Ship MV Yung No 606 [2001] SBHC, High Court of the Solomon Islands The Heinrich Bjorn (1886) 11 App Cas 270 Shell Oil Co Ltd v The Ship Lastrigioni (1974) 131 CLR 1 The Escherscheim [1976] 2 Lloyd Rep 1 Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Turner The "Zeta" [1893] AC 468 Scott v Davis (2000) 204 CLR 333, [2000] HCA 521 Sweeney v Boylan Nominees Pty Ltd (2006) 227 ALR 46 Leichhardt Municipal Council v Montgomery (2007) 233 ALR 2000, [2007] HCA 6 Arochem Corp v Wilomi Inc (1992) AMC 2347 Carrington Shipways Pty Ltd v Patrick Operations (1991) 24 NSWLR 745 Cellthene Pty Ltd v WKJ Hauliers Pty Ltd [1981] 1 NSWLR 606 The Pioneer Container [1994] 2 AC 324
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate