Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

22 articles on this Page

BUNKER COAL CONTRACT.

News
Cite
Share

BUNKER COAL CONTRACT. TREDEGAIl COMPANY'S ACTION. In the Commercial Court of King s Bench on Friday, before Mr. Justice Bailliaehe, sitting without a jurv the case of the Tredegar Iron Company, Limited, v. Treehmami, Carrick and Company, was heard. Defendants carry on business as coal agents at Mount Stuart-square, Cardiff. Mr. Adair Roche, K.C., and -Air. Nealson (instructed by "Messrs. Yanghan and Roche, C arclifl) appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Holman Gregory, K.C., and Mr. Inskip (instructed by Messrs. Ingledew and Sons, of Cardiff) were for the defendants. Mr. Roche, in opening the plaintiffs' case, said it was a claim by the Tredegar Iron Company against the defendants, merchants and buyers ef bunker coals in Cardif,, in respect of a contract dated the i8th February, 1913, for the supply of 5oOQ tons of Waterloo small coal sold by the plaintiffs to the defendants for delivery in equal monthly instalments for 11 months in 1913, Plaintifts brought their action for damages because of the defendants' failure to take delivery of 4,425 tons. They accepted delivery of 1,075 tons, and it was in respect of the balance that the present action was launched. Broadly, the defence was that the Tredegar Company supplied coal which was not Waterloo smalls and thereby broke the contract, and that the coal supplied was not the class required for bunker purposes. The plaintiffs' answer to that statement was that it was quite inaccurate as the coal was not sup- plied for bunker purposes, but for the defendants to blend it with other coal to be used as bunkers. The second point taken by the defence was that the contract was cancelled by mutual consent. A third point raised was that there was a con- dition in the contract that the coal supplied by plaintiffs should be fitted for bunker use and that it was not so fitted. Mr. Roche submitted to the court that it was no part of the duty of the Tredegar Company to supply anything other than Waterloo small coal, and on the other hand the defendants who were expert blenders of coal useful for bunker purposes were aware of it. The coal supplied to the defendants was from two seams, the class of coal from both being identical and known as the red ash type. Mr. Horatio Kendrick, plaintiffs' manager in Cardiff, gave evidence, and the hearing was adjourned. THE JUDGMENT. The hearing was concluded on Tuesday, when His Lordship found for the plaintiffs, and assessed damages at JB625. Mr Justice Bailhache, after re-calling the the circumstances under which the contract was entered into, said it had been argued for the defend- ants that the contract provided for vendors' Water- loo small coal," and it was said that there was a coal that had been worked by a colliery known as the Waterloo Colliery, and had been put on the market for many years by the Waterloo Colliery, and that coal was coal from one seam only, and it was bound to be from one seam only, because that was the only seam they were working, and it had come to be known among buyers on the market as Waterloo Colliery coal. ° It was said that when a particular coal had got to be known as a coal of a particular colliery it was not open to that colliery to sink to other measures and sell coal therefrom as the original coal, even though they might be similar coals, and even although that coal, either by itself or mixed with the other coal that they had hitherto put on the market, was to be regarded as of the same description. The defendants said that, if plaintiffs wanted to so mix the coal, they must give notice to the world of their intention to make the change. It was said this notice should have been given, even although the coal from the new seam was as good as the other coal. The main question that he had to decide, therefore, was whether it was right to sell as Waterloo Colliery small coals coal from the old and well-known seam mixed with coal from the Brith. dir, which represented an extension of the colliery. Continuing, His Lordship said he had come to the conclusion that if the plaintiffs had sold their Water- loo Colliery small coals as coming from a particular vein they would have been entirely wrong in this case in mixing the coal from seams down below, even though the qualities of the two coals were practically indistinguishable but where they did not, in fact, state the seam from which they got the coal, but sold it, not as coal from a particular seam, but as "vendors Waterloo Colliery small coal," it seemed to him (the jndge) that the only question he had to ask himself was, Was this coal correctly and properly described by that description ? He could only answer that question in the affirmative. It was perfectly true that it came from two seams instead of one, but both were equally the vendors' seams, and both seams were properly called the Waterloo Colliery." It was a name of their own, and if the plaintiff's chose to apply it to the level and to the pit, he thought they were perfectly entitled to do so. NO BREACH BY VENDORS. If the plaintiffs sunk to other measures and sold the coals as Waterloo smalls they were entitled to do so. If the two coals were essentially different in character, of course, different questions would arise, but here the coals were for commercial purposes practically the same. He was satisfied therefore, that the plaintiffs properly gave the title of Waterloo Colliery small coals to the coals that they sold to defendants, and, therefore, there was no breach of contract by the ven- dors. He was of opinion that there was no agreement to cancel the contract* and, therefore, he gave judg- ment for plaintiffs.

AFTER EIGHT YEARS.I

.A NEW ZEALAND OBSERVATORY.I

[No title]

Advertising

IPUBLIC LIGHTING AT ABER-…

[No title]

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

BARGOED LODGING-HOUSEI |INCIDENT.

Advertising

BEDWELLTV BOARD OF GUARDIANS.

Advertising

I PRINCE OF WALES'S TOUR.

[No title]

Advertising

- - - )! I FALSE INDUCEMENTS…

I COMMON INFORMERS' SUITS.…

OFFICER'S FATAL DUEL. I

ILONG ARCTIC SLED TRIP.

I DR. DIESEL.

Advertising

W A NTRD M THE POLICE. I