Cases - Bailment

Question 1

Conway v Cockram Motors

Answer 1

Facts:
Cockram in Bailment for Conways Beamer. $6000 of damage to Conway’s car. Car in lit showroom with doors locked and secuirity chain with keys placed in visor in case of fire.
Issue:
Was Cockram in breach of bailment and therefore liable?
Decision:
yes
Reasoning:
Very clear bailement and damage
theft/damage was a foreseeable risk which the defendant did not take reasonable precautions for - an alarm would have been a reasonable precaution

Question 2

Skyway Service Station v McDonald

Answer 2

Facts:
McDonald left car in Skyway carpark which he thought was fenced. The facility has no security, no fence and the cars parked close together and chained. The car was broken into an chattels stolen
Issue:
What was the scope of the Bailee’s DoC
Decision:
Did not show reasonable care
Reasoning:
Inadequacy of bailment agreement does not limit the Duty of care. Where one is paying a fee, entitled to expect all reasonable care
Obiter: If the bailer knew about the inadequacies then accepted them then the bailee would not be in breach.

Question 3

Morris v Martin

Answer 3

Facts:
Morris gave fur coat to furriers who then gave it to Martin to clean
Issue:
was their a bailment relationship
Decision
Yes
Reasoning:
Martin aware that the coat had another owner that was not the furriers. As has this awareness had a bailment duty from head bailor to sub-bailor

Question 4

Pioneer Containers

Answer 4

Facts:
Cargo owners shipped goods to Hong Kong and contracted carriers to do so
The carriers contracted ship owners to go from Taiwan to Hong Kong, but sunk :(
The ship owners had jurisitiction clause that must be done in accordance to Chinese law
Issue: Is the head bailor held to the sub-bailor’s contract
Decision: Yes
Reasoning: