Re The New York Star [1981] 1 WLR 138
Judgement for the case Re The New York Star
Table Of Contents
Plaintiff contracted X to convey packages to the destination.
Defendant, stevedores contracted by X to unload the ship, negligently allowed the packages to be stolen in the course of the unloading.
There was a clause in the contract that conferred the same protection that X had (claims to be brought within 1 year) on Defendant and Privy Council held that this “Himalaya” clause was effective despite Defendant not being a party to the original contract.
Lord Wilberforce
In the normal course of things stevedores can rely on these clauses for ease of business + precedent of The Eurymadon (above).
-
This can apply in tort as well as contract provided the exemption clauses relate to both contractual and tortious liability. Had to be interpreted in the light of industry practice
What about where a party is unaware of industry practice/chooses not to use it?
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on Re The New York Star
Contract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Shipping and International Trade Law notes fully updated for recent exa...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Shipping and International Trade | Monetary Remedies Notes (65 pages) |
| Shipping and International Trade | Parties Notes (30 pages) |
| Contract Law | Privity Notes (43 pages) |
Contract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.