AF00101281 Premiers correspondence 1947-1948. NRS-12060 [9/3452] 47/3607 - Flipbook - Page 11
4
or "Powers who
0(whether that be taken to mean "signatories"
V. Imperial Airppson
Phili
cf.
"
have ratified the Convention
nt case is
prese
the
in
age
carri
ways Ld. (1939 A.C. 332)) the
age (Carriage
carri
nal
natio
inter
of
within the special categories
& 0. 1938
(S.R.
1938
Order
3)
(No.
)
by Air (Parties to Convention
te No. 58 of
No, 1456 Schedule Part 1) and Commonwealth Gazet
.
1676)
24th October 1935 at pp. 1675 and
liable
Article 20 paragraph 1(1) renders the carrier
in
age
carri
the
of
d
perio
the
g
for all damage arising durin
the
;
goods
to
e
damag
or
of
loss
the event of destruction or
19 paragraph 2
"period of the carriage" is defined in Article
carrier whether
as "such time as the goods are in charge of the
case of a landin an airport or on board an aircraft or in the
The liability
er."
soev
what
e
plac
any
ing outside an airport in
or by river perdoes not extend to any carriage by land by sea
carriage takes
such
where
that
t
excep
formed outside an airport
age by air for
place in the performance of a contract for carri
ery any damage
the purposes of loading trans-shipment or deliv
have been the
isixesumed subject to proof to the contrary to
caniage by air.
result of an event which took place during the
(Article 19, paragraph 2).
that
The carriers escape liability (1) if they prove
avoid
to
measures
they and their agents have taken all necessary
to take such measthe damage or that it was impossible for them
occasioned by
ures, or (2) if they prove that the damage was
of the aircraft
negligent pilotage or negligence in the handling
they and their
or in navigation and that in all other respects
the damage or
agents have taken all necessary measures to avoid
or contributed to
(3) if they prove that the damage was caused
e (when the Court
by the negligence of the part suffering damag
law exonerate
may in accordance with the provisions of its own
(Article 20
)
the carrier wholly or partly from his liability.
paragraph 1 (3) and (4))
in
The circumstances of the present case satisfy
rity
obscu
the
my opinion the prerequisites of liability and
the carrier
surrounding the loss would seem to suggest that
ces.
defen
ble
possi
the
could not avail himself of any of
of the
ct
respe
in
e
liabl
is
itherefore think that the carrier
!loss of the goods.
cult
The quantum of damage claimable is a more diffi
of
y
ilit
liab
the
that
only
question. The Conditions provide
ram
kilog
per
s
franc
250
carriers is limited to the sum of
-five and half
(meaning the French franc consisting of sixty
(Article 20
900).
ess
finen
simal
milligrams of gold of mille
be converted
may
sums
these
tions
Condi
paragraph 2). Under the
These figures
into any national currency in round figures.
tain the actual
constitute the maximum liability but to ascer
the law of the
liability I think it is necessary to look to
tuted* In
place where an action would if necessary be insti
Sydney (Article
this case, such an action could be brought in
most convenient.
22 paragraph 4), which presumably would be the
Wales as
The law applicable in the State of New South
from
ed
deriv
to quantum of damages for breach of contract is
l damantia
subst
the common law. The general principle is that
in
party
ed
ages in contract are intended to place the injur
been
act
contr
the position in which he would have been had the
243).
ed.
2nd
act
duly performed (Salmond and Williams on Contr
The
e.
damag
al
Such damages are divided into general and speci
the direct natural
former are such as the law will presume to be
of whilst the latter
ained
or probable consequence of the act compl
but must be
act,
the
will not be inferred from the notice of
ings.
plead
the
alleged with reasonable particularity in
mere
The principle behind the distinction is that the
ng
warni
cient
suffi
a
is
h
breac
its
narration of the contract and
s claim in so far
to the defendant of the nature of the plaintiff'
p.
