Waterford Harbour Commissioners and Others v Great Southern Railways Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 21 May 1931
• Date: 21 May 1931
• Court: Supreme Court (Irish Free State)

[S. C., I.F.S.],

Waterford Harbour Commissioners and Others

and

Great Southern Railways Co

- Double line altered to single line - Alteration objected to by Harbour Board of port served by railway - Port alleged to be placed at "undue disadvantage" compared with other port - Application for relief to Railway Tribunal - Jurisdiction of Railway Tribunal to hear application -Obligations imposed on amalgamated railway company - All reasonable railway facilities to be given to induce traffic to pass to port - "By their rates, fares, or otherwise" - Doctrine ofejusdem generis - Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854 (17 18 Vict., c. 31), s. 2 - Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888 (51 52 Vict., c.25), s. 30 - 63 64 Vict., ch. ccxlvii, s. 33 -63 64 Vict., ch. ccxlviii, s. 25 - Railways Act, 1924 (No. 29 of 1924), s. 30 (5).

A local Act, 63 & 64 Vict., ch. ccxlvii (hereinafter referred to as the "Amalgamation Act"), which amalgamated two railways, provided by s. 33: —"33. On and after the date of amalgamation [of the two railways] the following provisions for the protection of the port of Waterford shall have effect (that is to say):—'(1) The company shall give all reasonable railway facilities to induce traffic to pass to and from and viaWaterford, and shall not by their rates or fares (whether local or through) or otherwise place the port or City of Waterford at an undue disadvantage as compared with any other port or city in Ireland to or from which traffic is or may be carried by means of the railways of the company; . . . . '(8) The company upon the passing of this Act shall give all reasonable railway facilities to induce traffic to pass to and from and via Waterford to and from the districts served by the amalgamated company and particularly from the districts represented by the following centres . . . . and shall not by their rates, fares or charges or otherwise do anything which may divert or may have the effect of diverting traffic passing or desirous, of passing to or from such districts, respectively from, to, or via Waterford from so passing, or otherwise placing Waterford at an undue disadvantage with respect to traffic to or from such districts.'" The two railways so amalgamated were subsequently further amalgamated with other railways under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1924, and all these amalgamated railways became one system, worked by the appellant company. One of these railways had, for portion of its length, a double line of rails...