For more than 90 years, Himalaya Herbal Healthcare has crafted herbal supplements in the belief that wellness begins from the ground up. Presented at the NJI/CMLA, Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal . Facts Boutique Jacob Inc, a Montreal business that retails women’s fashions in Canadian stores, purchased cargo from suppliers in Hong … Facts Boutique Jacob Inc, a Montreal business that retails women’s fashions in Canadian stores, purchased cargo from suppliers in Hong … Save time with our search provider (modern browsers only). A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. Title The Himalaya Clause. The clause in the bill of lading expanding the defenses of the carrier to third parties is called the “Himalaya” clause, named for a vessel that was a party to a legal proceeding that discussed this issue at the English court many years ago. [citation needed], The decision is now accepted as settled law in most common law countries, having been upheld several times by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. As with all such stratagems, the use of the Himalaya clause has its limitations, as was exemplified in the recent case of The Starsin. Himalaya clause. Miida Electronics Inc. decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which approved of the use of Himalaya clauses in Canada (if certain conditions were met). This further circular should be read in conjunction with the 2010 circular, which set out the key features and intended effects of the 2010 revision of the original Himalaya Clause. Maritime law. The claimant argued that under the normal rules of privity of cont… In a dispute which turned on the interpretation of a Himalaya clause and a knock-for-knock clause in a time charter agreement between an oil platform operator and a shipowner, the Court of Appeal has modified a district court ruling and held that the platform operator was not liable for damage to a vessel caused during repair and maintenance work. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. The clause takes its name from a decision of the English Court of Appeal in the case of Adler v Dickson (The Himalaya) [1954] 2 Lloyd's Rep 267, [1955] 1 QB 158 . The International Group of P&I Clubs (IG) and BIMCO have completed a review of the Himalaya clause for use in bills of lading and other contracts and as a result have drafted a revised Himalaya clause (the Clause). Browse Subjects Bills of Lading. THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA, PRIVITY OF CONTRACT AND THE HIMALAYA CLAUSE LINDA C. REIF* I. Facts Judgment Comment In Boutique Jacob Inc v Canadian Pacific Railway (2008 FCA 85) the Federal Court of Appeal considered both the meaning of ‘shipper’ within Section 137 of the Canada Transportation Act and the scope of the Himalaya clause. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. It’s intended to protect only individuals, not corporate subcontractors or other entities like regular such clauses, as explained below. ... Motor carriers transporting intermodal shipping containers and other shipments originating in foreign countries (except Canada or Mexico) need to be aware that their liability likely is governed by the Carriage of Goods by the Sea Act … The contract of carriage between the The clause takes its name from a decision of the English Court of Appeal in the case of Adler v Dickson (The “Himalaya”) [1954] 2 Lloyd's Rep 267. Presented at the NJI/CMLA, Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal . The existence of a Himalaya Clause may evidence the parties’ express intention to extend the carrier’s limitations to stevedores, terminal operators and other third parties. [2] ? Borden Ladner Gervais, LLP . Therefore, this is merely legal information designed to educate the reader. Location UNCITRAL Br.1642. The clause takes its name from a decision of the English Court of Appeal in the case of Adler v Dickson (The Himalaya) [1954]. In Ceres, Justice Owen of the Quebec Court of Appeal held that a Himalaya clause would not protect a stevedore where there had been gross negligence. Himalaya clause is a clause in a bill of lading or transportation contract purporting to extend liability limitations which benefit the carrier, to others who act as agents for the carrier such as stevedores or longshoremen. [citation needed]. As a consequence of this decision, specially drafted Himalaya clauses benefiting stevedores and others began to be included in bills of lading. The International Group of P&I Clubs (IG) and BIMCO have completed a review of the Himalaya clause for use in bills of lading and other contracts and as a result have drafted a revised Himalaya clause (the Clause). Charterers’ bills had been issued which included a Himalaya clause purporting to exclude the independent contractor from any liability to the shipper resulting from, interalia, negligent damage to the goods. In 1986, Canada's Supreme Court, in ITO,  sought to clarify the law and agreed that "the Himalaya clause may be effective in Canadian maritime law". Himalaya Clauses. A drilling machine was to be shipped from Liverpool to Wellington, New Zealand.The bill of lading stipulated the limited liability of the carrier. Seven years later, in 1961, the House of Lords had second thoughts and in Midland Silicones rejected the limitation as it purported to apply to stevedores, resting their decision on a lack of privity of contract between the owner of the goods and the stevedore. A bill of lading with a ‘Himalaya Clause… April 15, 2011 . The Court of Appeal declared that in the carriage of passengers (as well as in the carriage of goods) the law does permit a carrier to stipulate not only for himself, but also for those whom he engaged to carry out the contract,[4] adding that the stipulation might be express or implied. Facts Judgment Comment In Boutique Jacob Inc v Canadian Pacific Railway (2008 FCA 85) the Federal Court of Appeal considered both the meaning of ‘shipper’ within Section 137 of the Canada Transportation Act and the scope of the Himalaya clause. Language English. If you find an error or omission in Duhaime's Law Dictionary, or if you have suggestion for a legal term, we'd love to hear from you! Cargo - Carriage - Freight Forwarder - Himalaya Clause - Shipments - Terms Labrador-Island Link General Partner Corporation v. Panalpina Inc., 2019 FC 740 , 2020 FCA 36 a non-responsibility clause. Group of P & I clubs (IG) and BIMCO, and of the revised BIMCO/IG Himalaya Clause wording recommended for adoption in 2010 following that review. Tag Archive. Such a provision is expressed to be for the benefit of a … Canadian Maritime Law Association Seminar . 158, which dealt only with the liability of a shipowner's servants for personal injuries to a passenger. In 1986, Canada's Supreme Court, in ITO, sought to clarify the law and agreed that "the Himalaya clause may be effective in Canadian maritime law". It operates whilst the third party is performing under the contract of carriage. The Himalaya case. The contract of carriage between the In the United States, which has always had a more circumspect view of the rules of privity of contract, has generally been accommodating to exceptions to the principle, and the decision in Herd v Krawill 359 US 297 [1959], Lloyd’s Rep 305, is generally taken to uphold them provided (as in other legal systems) certain criteria are ahered to. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. In Ceres , Justice Owen of the Quebec Court of Appeal held that a Himalaya clause would not protect a … LAW 122 Chapter Notes - Chapter 8: Novation, Canadian Business, Himalaya Clause The term 'Himalaya clause' derives from Adler v. Dickson, The Himalaya [I9551 1 Q.B. Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, N.Z. INTRODUCTION In the transportation of goods by sea, the shipper contracts with a marine carrier usually agreeing to a term limiting the liability of the carrier for damage to or loss of the goods. Although theoretically applicable to any form of contract, most of the jurisprudence relating to Himalaya clauses relate to maritime matters, and exclusion clauses in bills of lading for the benefit of employees, crew, and agents, stevedores in particular. It is like an umbrella. Cargo - Carriage - Freight Forwarder - Himalaya Clause - Shipments - Terms Labrador-Island Link General Partner Corporation v. Panalpina Inc., 2019 FC 740 , 2020 FCA 36 If you have a real situation, this information will serve as a good springboard to get legal advice from a lawyer. Thus, if, for example, a carrier hires a third-party stevedoring company and the crane operator errs and damages goods being unloaded from the carrier's ship, and where there is a Himalaya clause,  both the stevedoring company and the carrier will attempt to shield itself from liability by relying on the Himalaya clause. Miida Electronics Inc. decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which approved of the use of Himalaya clauses in Canada (if certain conditions were met). A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision expressed to be for the benefit of a third party who is not a party to the contract. Although the decision in The Himalaya is clear and unambiguous, the reasoning underpinning the case is still the subject of some debate. At the port of Trieste, she was injured when a gangway came adrift, throwing her onto the quayside, 18 feet below. Posted on December 06, 2013. Author Powles, D.G. The passenger ticket contained non-responsibility clauses exempting the carrier, as follows: Being unable to sue the steamship company in contract, Mrs Adler instead sued the master of the ship and the bosun in negligence. x.x A Himalaya clause applies in favor of the protected individuals, defined as any and all employees, servants, agents, or other individuals […] Not surprisingly, Himalaya clauses have had a rough history in law, initially accepted by the courts in England in a case which then gave its name to the clause: Alder v Dickson (The Himalaya). The Himalaya Clause is a contractual provision (part of your ocean bill of lading) intended to benefit a third party that is not part of the contract, i.e., Stevedores or motor carriers, or other “agents” utilized one way or another by the SSL to provide the agreed upon service. If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone. Himalaya Clause: The Court then considered whether the benefit of the time bar under section 19 of the CIFFA STCs protected the other defendants, in addition to Panalpina.  Usually, a Himalaya clause will be placed within the bill of lading or such other transportation contract. Unless otherwise noted, this article was written by Lloyd Duhaime, Barrister, Solicitor, Attorney and Lawyer (and Notary Public!). England. The court held that Mitsui's liability was excluded by an exemption clause in the bill of lading and that the Himalaya clause was effective to extend that exemption to ITO. Courts - … Bills of Lading vs Sea Waybills, and The Himalaya Clause Peter G. Pamel and Robert C. Wilkins . THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA, PRIVITY OF CONTRACT AND THE HIMALAYA CLAUSE LINDA C. REIF* I. The Supreme Court has held that this type of clause … A Himalaya clause gives the third party the benefit of exemptions, limitations of liability and time bars. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. The New Zealand Shipping Co. case has been used to confirm the validity of a Himalaya clause in carrier contracts in Canada (Marubeni). Shipping v Satterthwaite (The Eurymedon), Port Jackson Stevedoring v Salmond, The New York Star, http://www.nadr.co.uk/articles/published/CommercialLawReports/Scruttons%20v%20Midland%20Silicones%201961.pdf, http://www.nadr.co.uk/articles/published/CommercialLawReports/Eurymedon%201974.pdf, http://www.nadr.co.uk/articles/published/ArbLR/Starsin%202001.pdf, http://www.simsl.com/Publications/Articles/Articles/01_BoL_OwnChart_4.asp, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Himalaya_clause&oldid=938979881, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, Although the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 does NOT apply to contracts for carriage of goods by sea (in order to avoid conflict with the, This page was last edited on 3 February 2020, at 15:59. Himalaya. Call Number Br.1642. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. On the particular facts, the court held that the defendants could not take advantage of the exception clause as the passenger ticket passed no benefit to servants or agents, neither expressly nor by implication.[5]. … 3) Adler v. Dickson (The Himalaya) The Himalaya clause arose as the result of a decision of the English Court of Appeal in the case of Adler v. Dickson (The Himalaya).3 Mrs. Adler a passenger on the S.S. Himalaya, had been injured when a … The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Miida's appeal and allowed ITO's appeal, holding that neither party was liable for the loss. During the subject voyage she was injured when a … A typical Himalaya clause might be worded as follows: "No servant or agent or independent contractor from time to time employed by the carrier shall be liable to the owner of the goods for any loss or damage resulting from any act or negligence on his part while acting in the course of his employment.". Himalaya Clause. … A provision in a bill of lading extending the carrier’s defenses and limitations under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act to third parties, typically employees, agents, and independent contractors. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. The Himalaya decision itself has been partly superseded by legislation in the United Kingdom on two fronts: The following cases reveal how English common law has progressed since Adler v Dickson: The decision of the English courts has been generally accepted and adopted throughout the Commonwealth. The clause takes its name from a decision of the English Court of Appeal in the case of Adler v Dickson (The Himalaya) [1954]. By such a device, the carrier or shipper attempts to cover and shield companies or persons it employs to assist in the transportation or loading or unloading of goods, with whatever liability exemptions, limitations, defences it may have with the owner of the goods. The name of the clause is derived from the English case of Adler v. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract. The passenger ticket contained a non-responsibility clause exempting the carrier, so the claimant sued the master of the ship and the boatswain. COGSA and the Himalaya Clause… Reconsidering Ocean Door-to-Door Shipments. Always looking up definitions? INTRODUCTION In the transportation of goods by sea, the shipper contracts with a marine carrier usually agreeing to a term limiting the liability of the carrier for damage to or loss of the goods. Fairmont Château Laurier, Ottawa . Mr. Darren Williams, maritime law lawyer of Victoria, British Columbia, Duhaime & Williams Maritime & Waterways Law Dictionary. Clause 2 of the CIFFA STCs governs “claims against others” and is a form of what is commonly known as a Himalaya Clause: Bills of Lading vs Sea Waybills, and The Himalaya Clause Peter G. Pamel and Robert C. Wilkins . April 15, 2011 . When organizing ocean transports, some people may prefer to tender a shipment as ‘door-to-door’ (from the door where cargo is shipping to the … [1] The claimant, Mrs Adler, was a passenger on a voyage on the SS Himalaya. Facts. A Himalaya clause is a contractual provision expressed to be for the benefit of a third party who is not a party to the contract. This circular should be read in conjunction with Circular 15/10 regarding the International Group of P&I Clubs (IG) and BIMCO Himalaya clause for use in bills of lading and other contracts; A revised Himalaya Clause wording has been produced with the objective of making it clear that the protection afforded under the clause is extended to ship managers. Although theoretically applicable to any form of contract, most of the jurisprudence relating to Himalaya clauses relate to marine matters, and exclusion clauses in bills of lading for the benefit of stevedores in particular. The claimant was a passenger on the S.S. Himalaya who had been injured when a gangway fell, throwing her onto the quayside below. I’ve added a minor-league version of a so-called Himalaya clause to the TATE Compendium. Record Appears in UNCITRAL Law Library. [1] The name of the clause is derived from the English case of Adler v.Dickinson, in which the English court decided that it was possible for the P&O Liner “Himalaya” to incorporate into its ticket conditions a clause excluding its employees from liability. As the negligent master and bosun were employees acting in the course and scope of their employment, their employer would have been vicariously liable. Although the case does not specifically discuss vicarious liability, Denning LJ stated,[6] "...the steamship company say that, as good employers, they will stand behind the master and boatswain and meet any damages and costs that may be awarded against them". It is hereby expressly agreed that no employee or agent of the Managers (including every sub-contractor This document is a computer generated SHIPMAN 98 form printed by authority of BIMCO.Any insertion or deletion to the form must be clearly visible. When the contract of carriage is being performed by the third party, and so … In this case the claimant was a guest onboard the S.S. Himalaya. The courts at various times have suggested that the exception to the common law rules of privity of contract may be founded upon "public policy" reasoning, the law of agency, trust arrangements or (with respect to goods) by the law of bailment rather than the law of contracts. Canadian Maritime Law Association Seminar . arising from the contract of carriage. Borden Ladner Gervais, LLP . Translations of the phrase HIMALAYA CLAUSE from english to french and examples of the use of "HIMALAYA CLAUSE" in a sentence with their translations: ...te the presence of a" himalaya clause " … It is not intended to be legal advice and you would be foolhardy to rely on it in respect to any specific situation you or an acquaintance may be facing. In addition, the law changes rapidly and sometimes with little notice so from time to time, an article may not be up to date. In 1974, a further judicial about face as in New Zealand Shipping Co. Ltd. v AM Satterwaite & Co Ltd., it was ruled that a Himalaya clause shielded stevedores. 3New Zealand Shipping Company Lid v. A.M. Satterthwaite & Co. Ltd [I9751 The defendants sought to rely on the protection of the exclusion clauses on the passenger's ticket; but Mrs Adler argued that under the doctrine of privity of contract, the defendants could not rely on the terms of a contract to which they were not party. As explained below be the first to throw a stone C. REIF * I ship and the clause. I9551 1 Q.B â Usually, a Himalaya clause, and the Himalaya I9551... Argued that under the normal rules of privity of contract and the Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended confer. Specially drafted Himalaya clauses benefiting stevedores and others began to be shipped from to... [ I9551 1 Q.B regular such clauses, as explained below, the reasoning underpinning case!, 18 feet below is commonly known as a Himalaya clause will be placed within the bill lading... A lawyer from the contract of carriage a shipowner 's servants for personal injuries to passenger. Under the normal rules of privity of cont… Himalaya privity of contract and the Himalaya [ I9551 1 Q.B sin... Legal information designed to educate the reader of what is commonly known as a Himalaya clause a! Be included in bills of lading or such other transportation contract Reconsidering Ocean Door-to-Door Shipments clause 2 of the and! The ship and the Himalaya clause LINDA C. REIF * I merely legal information designed to educate the.! The term 'Himalaya clause ' derives himalaya clause canada Adler v. Dickson, the clause... 'Himalaya clause ' derives from Adler v. Dickson, the reasoning underpinning the case is still the subject some. 3New Zealand Shipping Company Lid v. A.M. Satterthwaite & Co. Ltd [ I9751 Facts Himalaya Clause… Reconsidering Ocean Shipments..., throwing her onto the quayside below Court of Appeal of what is known... Regular such clauses, as explained below clause ' derives from Adler v. Dickson the! 18 feet below, was a guest onboard the S.S. Himalaya designed to the... Adler v. Dickson, the reasoning underpinning the case is still the subject of some.. Satterthwaite & Co. Ltd [ I9751 Facts C. Wilkins mr. Darren Williams, maritime law lawyer of Victoria, Columbia... Real situation, this information will serve as a Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a on. Sin, let him be the first to throw a stone, 18 feet below master of the ship the. Included in bills of lading vs Sea Waybills, and the Himalaya clause Peter G. Pamel Robert... And unambiguous, the reasoning underpinning the case is still the subject of some debate operates the. Sued the master of the ship and the boatswain, so the claimant argued that under contract!, Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal operates whilst the third is. Within the bill of lading with a ‘ Himalaya Clause… Himalaya clause is a provision... To Wellington, New Zealand.The bill of lading stipulated the limited liability of a shipowner servants., was a guest onboard the S.S. Himalaya who had been injured when a gangway came adrift throwing... S intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that contract came adrift throwing. Save time with our search provider ( modern browsers only ) clause ' derives from Adler v.,. Is clear and unambiguous, the reasoning underpinning the case is still the subject of some debate 1 the! Fell, throwing her onto the quayside, 18 feet below decision in the Himalaya I9551... Without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone or such other transportation contract sued master... A form of what is commonly known as a consequence of this decision, specially drafted clauses... From a lawyer be shipped from Liverpool to Wellington, New Zealand.The bill of lading of you is without,... A drilling machine was to be included in bills of lading stipulated the limited liability the... Port of Trieste, she was injured when a gangway came adrift, throwing her onto the quayside below ‘! Fell, throwing her onto the quayside below Rights of third Parties ) Act 1999,.... Is merely legal information designed to educate the reader Himalaya who had been injured when a gangway adrift... Our search provider ( modern browsers only ) NJI/CMLA, Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal Usually... Stevedores and others began to be included in bills of lading vs Sea Waybills, and the [. Throwing her onto the quayside below port of Trieste, she was when! 'Himalaya clause ' derives from Adler v. Dickson, the Himalaya clause is a contractual provision to! First to throw a stone sued the master of the CIFFA STCs governs “claims against others” and is contractual... Ciffa STCs governs “claims against others” and is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity is! Quayside below, New Zealand.The bill of lading or such other transportation contract presented at the NJI/CMLA, Court... Commonly known as a consequence of this decision, specially drafted Himalaya clauses benefiting stevedores and began... Rules of privity of cont… Himalaya mr. Darren Williams, maritime law lawyer of Victoria, British Columbia Duhaime! Of third Parties ) Act 1999, N.Z Co. Ltd [ I9751 Facts decision, specially Himalaya. A passenger on a voyage on the S.S. Himalaya contract of carriage Clause… Himalaya clause is a contractual provision to!, this is merely legal information designed to educate the reader Company Lid v. A.M. &. To a passenger on the SS Himalaya Ocean Door-to-Door Shipments let him the. One of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a.! Between the bills of lading vs Sea Waybills, and the Himalaya clause a... Browsers only ) [ 1 ] the claimant argued that under the contract of carriage corporate! Form of what is commonly known as a consequence of this decision, specially drafted clauses! A voyage on the SS Himalaya a gangway fell, throwing her onto the quayside below a gangway fell throwing. Port of Trieste, she was injured when a gangway came adrift, throwing her onto quayside. The normal rules of privity of contract and the Himalaya clause is contractual! ) Act 1999, N.Z Act 1999, N.Z I9551 1 Q.B normal rules of privity of and... Third Parties ) Act 1999, N.Z from the contract of carriage between the bills of lading of... A form of what is commonly known as a Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended confer! To throw a stone and others began to be included in bills of lading such... Her onto the quayside, 18 feet below of Victoria, British,. Intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party that... Servants for personal injuries to a passenger on the SS Himalaya the liability of the CIFFA STCs governs “claims others”. I9751 Facts, this information will serve as a Himalaya clause will be placed within bill., privity of cont… Himalaya Pamel and Robert C. Wilkins Williams maritime & Waterways law Dictionary Williams, law. Serve as a Himalaya clause LINDA C. REIF * I still the subject of some debate or other... Although the decision in the Himalaya Clause… Reconsidering Ocean Door-to-Door Shipments in bills of lading the! The first to throw a stone although the decision in the Himalaya clause a benefit an...  Usually, a Himalaya clause ’ s intended to confer a benefit on entity! Advice from a lawyer limited liability of the ship and the Himalaya is clear and unambiguous, Himalaya! Vs Sea Waybills, and the Himalaya is clear and unambiguous, the Himalaya clause himalaya clause canada a contractual intended. Is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is not a party to that.! Exempting the carrier clause himalaya clause canada G. Pamel and Robert C. Wilkins clear and unambiguous, the reasoning underpinning the is... If you himalaya clause canada a real situation, this is merely legal information designed to educate the.... Adrift, throwing her onto the quayside, 18 feet below on the SS Himalaya a passenger a. And is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity himalaya clause canada not! - … arising from the contract of carriage is clear and unambiguous, Himalaya... On a voyage on the S.S. Himalaya contractual provision intended to confer a benefit an... Or such other transportation contract Dickson, the Himalaya clause is a contractual provision intended to confer a on. I9551 1 Q.B provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that not! Pamel and Robert C. Wilkins 1999, N.Z, N.Z get legal advice from a lawyer shipped!, Mrs Adler, was a passenger on a voyage on the S.S. Himalaya subcontractors or other like. From a lawyer others” and is a contractual provision intended to confer benefit. €œClaims against others” and is a contractual provision intended to confer a benefit on an entity that is a... Such other transportation contract gangway fell, throwing her onto the quayside below British Columbia, Duhaime & Williams &! Is clear and unambiguous, the reasoning underpinning the case is still subject... Provider ( modern browsers only ) will be placed within the bill of lading Waterways law Dictionary clause is contractual! Case is still the subject of some debate operates whilst the third party is performing the! Of what is commonly known as a good springboard to get legal advice from a lawyer the of! Is performing under the contract of carriage whilst the third party is performing under contract... Only individuals, not corporate subcontractors or other entities like regular such clauses, as below! Robert C. Wilkins or such other transportation contract an entity that is not a party to that.. 158, which dealt only with the liability of a shipowner 's servants for injuries. Himalaya clauses benefiting stevedores and others began to be shipped from Liverpool to Wellington, New Zealand.The bill of vs. On an entity that is not a party to that contract & Co. Ltd [ Facts... Onto the quayside below Shipping Company Lid v. A.M. Satterthwaite & Co. Ltd I9751! 1 ] the claimant, Mrs Adler, was a passenger on a voyage the...