APPEAL COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 April 1922, Page 5

APPEAL COURT.

BANANAS FOR NEW PLYMOUTH. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, April 7. The Court of Appeal heard argument in three cases —Wallabh Soma Moral, Charles William Raynor, and Mary HarX>s, all v. The Northern Steamship Co. Tha three cases involved the same legal considerations and were heard together. The statement of claim in Moral’s case alleged that an agreement was made between Moral and the respondent company to carry 30 cases or bananas from Onehunga to New Plymouth. The goods were delivered on the wharf at Onehunga, but were not loaded by respondent company, and as a result the bananas were rendered valueless. The respondent company denied that there was any contract to carry the goods, but if there was a contract, then it was subject to the special conditions endorsed on the shipping note, which exempted the respondent company from liability. In Raynor’s ease the claim was in respect of ten cases, and in Harris’ three eases. Wellington, Last Night.

Mr. Justice Herdman heard the three actions, and gave judgment in favour of the shipping company. From this judgment the appeal was now made. Mr. Myers, who appeared for the appellants, said that although only small amounts were claimed, the actions were test ones, and the court’s decision would be one of general importance to merchants. Mr. Myers contended that the shipping company was a common carrier, and was bound to carry goods which were delivered at a proper time to the ship’s side for carriage. It had been shown that there was no justification for its refusal to carry bananas. The company had taken motor cars and racehorses and left perishable goods, to which preference should have been given. Mr. Myers contended that, quite apart from the respondents’ liability as common carriers to carry cases of bananas, concerning which the dispute arose, there was ♦ a liability to carry goods under an express contract. This contract arose from the appellants accepting an advertised offer of respondent company to carry cargo. Mr. A. H. Johnstone also aadressed the court on behalf of appellants.

Mr. Meredith, for the respondent company, dealt with the facts of the Skerrett, K.C., for the respondent company, contended th'kt no contract had ever been entered into by the Northern Steamship Company to carry cases of fruit for appellants. What had' taken place between, the parties was mereley preliminary to a qontract. Appellants, he said, had never tendered goods to the company for carriage in its ship. Argument had not concluded when the court adjourned till to-morrow.