Sara Partington says Matrix has reinforced a bailee’s duties in relation to goods
The recent Mercantile Court decision in Matrix Europe Ltd and another v Uniserve Holdings Ltd and others [2009] EWHC 919 (Comm) will be of interest to any commercial entity whose business involves holding goods as bailee on behalf of a bailor or in carrying or managing goods, where such dealings might (even perhaps unintentionally or even mistakenly) give rise to the company being in control of the goods.
The facts
This was a rather tortured claim (taking six years to reach trial) in which the first claimant, Matrix, (M) sought damages from the D2, Uniserve, (U) in respect of the theft from U’s warehouse of a consignment of 5,000 Bluetooth mobile telephone adaptors worth £375,000.
U in turn brought a Pt 20 claim against the carrier, Birkart (B), whose mistake started the ball rolling.
M had retained B to carry the goods from M’s premises in Altrincham to Manchester Airport and thereafter, by airfreight, for delivery to the purchaser in Hong Kong. However, B’s own sub-contractor mistakenly delivered the goods to U’s
