AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Court rules out payment delays against damages

5th October 1995, Page 43
5th October 1995
Page 43
Page 43, 5th October 1995 — Court rules out payment delays against damages
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

The High Court has confirmed the considerable commercial benefit given to goods vehicle operators in the recovery of their haulage charges.

It has now been clearly decided there can be no deduction by way of abatement or set-off from a claim for freight charges arising from domestic carriage of goods. It will be recalled by readers of a previous Legal Bulletin that we advised that this legal principle had been applied in a case involving a claim for freight for international road haulage. Many hauliers have told us that they have been successful in obtaining judgment as a result.

In a case before the Divisional Court in March this year, representations were made unsuccessfully to convince the Court that the rule should not apply to charges for domestic carriage by land.

The position is quite clear. The operator having fulfiled a contract and delivered the goods, is entitled to freight charges. He should not be prevented because there are claims pending for damage to goods in transit or short delivery or other similar breaches of contract against the operator. Whilst it may seem illogical that carriers should be in this privileged position, which as the judge said, is not afforded to manufacturers, builders, accountants and others, he reluctantly agreed the rule applied. Cash flow is the life blood of any business so take advantage of this privilege. All too often the operator is faced with the customer's contention that the goods have been damaged in transit or there has been short delivery, despite the signing of a clear delivery note. That has been an excuse for non payment. The operator may be insured for such eventualities through his goods-in-transit policy and therefore any claim by the customer would be dealt with by the operators' insurers. The customer still refused payment. What is now quite clear is that where there is a claim for freight charges, the law is that there should be no deduction by way of abatement or set off from such charges.

Whether you are a motorcycle messenger delivering packages or a small van driver or driving an HGV delivering goods, the principle applies to you.

Provided the operator has done the job, he is entitled to be paid and without delay. Proceedings should therefore be issued and applications made for summary judgment to a district judge.

_J by Gary Hodgson

Tags

Organisations: High Court, Divisional Court
People: Gary Hodgson

comments powered by Disqus