From the Court

Brief court decisions on civil wrongs

 

By Safi Jimba

General Principle of Liability (XI)

We have not referred to any reported decision which is precisely in point but I would apply the reasoning of Viscount Haldane L.C. in Herd v. Weardale Steel, Coal and Coke Co. Ltd. ({1915} A.C. 67, at 71) where he said:

‘If a man gets into an express train and the doors are locked pending its arrival at its destination, he is not entitled, merely because the train has been stopped by signal, to call for the doors to be opened to let him out. He entered the train on the terms that he is to be conveyed to a certain station without the opportunity of getting out before that, and he must abide by the terms on which he has entered the train. So when a man goes down a mine, from which access to the surface does not exist in the absence of special facilities given on the part of the owner of the mine, he is only entitled to the use of these facilities (subject possibly to the exceptional circumstances to which I have alluded) on the terms on which Committee of the Privy Council in Robinsin v. Balmain New Ferry Co. ({1910} A.C. 295) that is so. There was a pier, and by the regulations a penny was to be paid by those who entered and a penny on getting out. The manager of the exit gate refused to allow a man who had gone in, having paid his penny, out, having changed his mind about embarking on a steamer, and wishing to return, to come out without paying his penny. It was held that, that was not false imprisonment; volenti non fit injuria. The man had gone in upon the pier knowing that those were the terms and conditions as to exit, which he had accepted….’

TO BE CONTINUED

 

Show More

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *