Nevin and Farrell v The Great Southern and Western Railway Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 30 November 1891
• Date: 30 November 1891
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Q. B. Div.

Before SIR P. O'BRIEN, C.J., and O'BRIEN, HOLMES, and GIBSON, JJ.

NEVIN AND FARRELL

and

THE GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN RAILWAY CO.

Great Western Railway Co. v. M'CarthyELR 12 App. Cas. 218.

Chippendale v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Co. 12 L. J. (N. S.) Q. B. 22.

M'Manus v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Co.UNK 28 L. J. Ex. 353.

Haynes v. Great Western Railway Co.UNK 41 L. T. (N. S) 436.

Great Western Railway Co. v. Glenister 22 W. R. 72.

M'Cance v. London and North-Western Railway Co.ENR 7 H. & N. 477.

Sheridan v. Midland Great Western Railway (Ireland) Co.UNK 24 L. R. Ir 146, 169.

The Manchester, Sheffield, and Lancashire Railway Co. v. BrownELR 8 App. Cas. 703.

Ashenden v. London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Co. 5 Ex. Div. 190.

Lewis v. Great Western Railway Co.ELR 3 Q. B. Div. 213.

Blower v. Great Western Railway Co.ELR L. R. 7 C. P. 655.

Pratt v. Ogden-burg Railway Co.UNK 102 Mass, 557.

Rooth v. North - Eastern Railway Co.ELR L. R. 2 Ex. 173.

Hawkins v. Great Western Railway Co. 17 Michigan, 57.

Redhead v. Midland Railway Co.UNK 38 L. J. Q. B. 168.

Corrigan v. Great Northern and Manchester, Sheffield, and Lancashire Railway Cos.UNK 6 L. R. Ir. 90.

Ronan v. Midland Railway Co.UNK 14 L. R. Ir. 157.

M'Cance v. London and North-Western Railway Co.ENR 7 H. & N. 477.

Sheridan's CaseUNK 24 L. R. Ir. 146.

Railway Company — Carriers — Negligence — Special contract — Reasonable conditions.

Tor.. XXX.] Q. B. & EX. DIVISIONS. 125 tenant for life to do what it is contended that Harvey has done. Appeal. The conditions he had to fulfil were all conditions precedent : he 1891. has failed to fulfil them, and having failed to fulfil them, his HUGHES V. contract cannot bind the remainderman. As to the merits I know FANAGAN. nothing and I say nothing. If the defendant has a meritorious Barry, L. J. case it is a pity that we have to decide against him ; but we are here to administer not to amend the law. Solicitors for the plaintiffs : Fox 8f Corcoran. Solicitor for the defendant : Henry Bonass. G. Y. D. NEVIN AND FARRELL v. THE GREAT SOUTHERN Q. B. Div. AND WESTERN RAILWAY CO. (1). 1891. Nov. 25, 26, Railway Company-Carriers-Negligence-Special contract-Reasonable 30. conditions. The plaintiffs sent horses by an ordinary goods train to be carried on the defendants' line from Castleisland to Dublin. There were no horse-boxes at the station, but the porters of the defendants' Company, without objection by the plaintiffs, put them into an ordinary goods wagon. The defendants have different rates for the conveyance of horses-two rates for horse-boxes, and a specially reduced rate for wagons, at which the animals are to be carried at the owner's risk, and the Company to be exempt from all liability, except from loss or damage caused by the wilful misconduct of their servants ; and at the wagon rate in case of loss or damage, however caused, no claim exceeding £10 shall be allowed for any one horse. At the full rate for horse-boxes the defendants undertook the ordinary duties of carriers. This condition amongst others, was indorsed on the loading docket, signed by the plaintiffs, and they also signed a declaration that the value of each horse did not exceed £10, and that they were delivered to the defendants for conveyance in cattle or goods wagons, and were to be carried entirely at the owners' risk. The floor of the wagon was smooth, and some of the horses slipped and injured themselves during the journey:- Held, that having regard to the alternative rates the crpitraet of carriage (I) Before SIB P. O'BRIEN., C.J., and O'BRIEN, HOLMES, and °assort, JJ. 126 LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. R. I. Q. B. Div. was a reasonable one, and was not rendered unreasonable by the want of horse 1891. boxes at the station, in the absence of any requisition for them by the NETIN plaintiffs. v. Held, also, that there was not any implied condition in the contract that the G. S. & W. wagon supplied was reasonably fit for the conveyance of horses. Illtmw.iit Co. Held, further, that the plaintiffs having signed a declaration that the horses were under the value of £10 each were precluded from objecting that the conditions were unreasonable as exempting the Company from liability beyond that amount, even in case of wilful misconduct. Acriow brought to recover damages for injuries to the plainÂtiffs' horses, while being conveyed from Castleisland to Dublin, on the defendants' railway. The case was tried before Palles, C. B., and a special jury, at the Trinity Sittings, 1891. The plaintiffs were partners, and on the 17th March, 1891, they brought seven horses, six of which they had bought at Castleisland fair, to the Castleisland station, on the defendants' line of railway. There was a special goods train at 3 o'clock, p.m., to arrive in Dublin the next morning. The plaintiff Nevin deposed that he asked for a wagon, and a porter told him to load them in one which he pointed out. While the plaintiff Farrell was putting in the horses he was prevented by a cattle drover driving in his cattle. The plainÂtiffs having complained to the porter, he pointed out a goods wagon and said, "That will do you." The plaintiffs said, "All right "; and the porter hammered down the iron grating in the bottom of the wagon. The surface of the grating was smooth. The plaintiff Nevin asked, " Is this wagon all right ? " The porter replied, "Yes, it will do you rightly as far as you are coming." This was close to the time of starting. There was no other wagon available. There was no horse-box at the station. The plaintiffs did not ask for a horse-box. It was the universal practice to send horses such as those by wagons as they were cheaper. The plaintiff Nevin admitted, on cross-examinaÂtion, that he did not intend to have horse-boxes, and that he knew he could send by horse-boxes either at the owner's risk or (at a higher rate) at the Company's risk. Before loading he signed a loading ticket, subject to the following amongst other conditions indorsed :- ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS AS TO ANIMALS. Q. B. Div. In addition to all such of the foregoing conditions as are capable of 1b91. application, the following conditions will also apply to the carriage of NE= . animals ;- G. S. v & W. 1.-When the charge for carriage is per wagon, the Company will not be RAILWAY Co. responsible for any loss or damage arising from overcrowding, or caused to one animal by others. 2.-The Company will not be...