Matsuura Machiner Corporation v. Melburn Truck Lines Ltd., docket A-213-96

CORAM:      PRATTE J.A.

     DÉCARY J.A.

     CHEVALIER D.J.

     A-213-96

BETWEEN:

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO

     LADEN ON BOARD THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     Appellants

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA

     LINE, NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE, c/o NYK LINE

     (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD.,

     THE OWNERS AND CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL

     HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND THE VESSEL

     HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

    

     A-220-96

BETWEEN:

     NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE

     Appellant

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO

     LADEN ON BOARD THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     and

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA

     LINE c/o NYK LINE (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU

     KAISHA LTD., THE OWNERS AND CHARTERERS

     OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

    

     A-221-96

BETWEEN:

     NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE

     Appellant

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO

     LADEN ON BOARD THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     and

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA

     LINE c/o NYK LINE (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU

     KAISHA LTD., THE OWNERS AND CHARTERERS

     OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

     (Delivered from the Bench at Montreal, Quebec,

     on Wednesday, March 12, 1997)

PRATTE J.A.

     These three appeals, which were joined and heard together pursuant to an order of the Chief Justice, are directed against three decisions of the Trial Division holding, in effect, that the Court has no jurisdiction in these matters.

     The appellant Nippon Yusan Kaisha Line ("NYK") is an ocean carrier which agreed to carry certain cargo under a through bill of lading from Japan to Toronto. The cargo had been placed in two containers; it was carried by ship from Japan to Port Elizabeth, New Jersey. From there, pursuant to an agreement it had made with NYK, Melburn Truck Lines Ltd. ("Melburn") carried the two containers by truck to its terminal in Mississauga, Ontario, which is accepted by all parties as being the Toronto destination mentioned in the bill of lading. Ten days or so later, at the request and for the benefit of the receiver of the cargo, Melburn carried it to Oakville, Ontario, where it was found to be damaged. The shipper and the receiver of the cargo then sued both NYK, the ocean carrier, and Melburn, the trucker, claiming compensation for the damage to the cargo; NYK subsequently served a third party notice on Melburn.

     The only question before the Trial Division and before us is whether the Trial Division, which clearly has jurisdiction with respect to the plaintiffs' claim against NYK pursuant to paragraph 22(2)(f) of the Federal Court Act, also has jurisdiction with respect to their claims and to NYK's claim against Melburn, the trucker which carried the two containers from Port Elizabeth to Mississauga and, then, to Oakville.

     The judge of first instance answered that question in the negative.

     The appellants concede that the circumstances on which the Supreme Court founded the jurisdiction of the Federal Court in ITO - Terminal Operations Ltd. v. Miida Electronics Ltd. ([1986] 1 S.C.R. 752) are not present here. They say, however, that this case is different and that the source of the jurisdiction of the Court in this case may be found both in paragraph 22(2)(f) and in section 23 of the Federal Court Act.¹

     According to the appellants, paragraph 22(2)(f) must be interpreted as conferring jurisdiction to the Court, when goods are carried under a through bill of lading, with respect to any claim for loss or damage to the goods occurring at any time or place during transit.

     As we indicated at the hearing, paragraph 22(2)(f) cannot, in our opinion, be given that meaning. The only claims to which this paragraph refers are those "arising out of an agreement relating to the carriage of goods on a ship under a through bill of lading" (in French, "une demande d'indemnisation fondée sur une convention relative au transport par navire..."). Clearly, the claims of the owner of the goods against the ocean carrier arose out of such an agreement. But the same cannot be said of the claims against Melburn.

     As to the contention that the jurisdiction of the Court could be based on section 23, it was rightfully rejected by the judge for the reason he gave, namely that "there is simply no underlying federal law supporting the claims made against Melburn Truck Lines Ltd."

     The appeals will therefore be dismissed.

     "Louis Pratte"

     J.A.

CORAM:      PRATTE J.A.

     DÉCARY J.A.

     CHEVALIER D.J.

     A-213-96

BETWEEN:

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO LADEN ON BOARD

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     Appellants

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE, NIPPON YUSAN

     KAISHA LINE, c/o NYK LINE (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD.,

     THE OWNERS AND CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     AND THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

    

     A-220-96

BETWEEN:

     NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE

     Appellant

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO LADEN ON BOARD

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     and

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE c/o NYK LINE

     (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD., THE OWNERS AND

     CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

    

     A-221-96

BETWEEN:

     NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE

     Appellant

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO LADEN ON BOARD

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     and

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE c/o NYK LINE

     (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD., THE OWNERS AND

     CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

Heard at Montreal, Quebec, on Tuesday, March 11 and Wednesday, March 12, 1997.

Judgment rendered from the Bench on Wednesday, March 12, 1997.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:      PRATTE J.A.

     IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

     A-213-96

BETWEEN:

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO LADEN ON BOARD

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     Appellants

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE, NIPPON YUSAN

     KAISHA LINE, c/o NYK LINE (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD.,

     THE OWNERS AND CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     AND THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

    

     A-220-96

BETWEEN:

     NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE

     Appellant

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO LADEN ON BOARD

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     and

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE c/o NYK LINE

     (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD., THE OWNERS AND

     CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

    

     A-221-96

BETWEEN:

     NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE

     Appellant

     - AND -

     MELBURN TRUCK LINES LTD.

     Respondent

     -and-

     MATSUURA MACHINER CORPORATION

     and

     ELLIOTT MACHINERY (CANADA) LTD.

     and

     ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THE CARGO LADEN ON BOARD

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS (B/L No. NYKS 130003079)

     and

     HAPAG LLOYD A.G., NIPPON YUSAN KAISHA LINE c/o NYK LINE

     (CANADA) INC., ASAHI UNYU KAISHA LTD., THE OWNERS AND

     CHARTERERS OF THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS AND

     THE VESSEL HEIDELBERG EXPRESS

     Third Party

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

__________________

¹      These provisions read as follows:
             22.      (2)      Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), it is hereby declared for greater certainty that the Trial Division has jurisdiction with respect to any one or more of the following:                  ...                  ( f)      any claim arising out of an agreement relating to the carriage of goods on a ship under a through bill of lading, or in respect of which a through bill of lading is intended to be issued, for loss or damage to goods occurring at any time or place during transit; ...
             23.      Except to the extent that jurisdiction has been otherwise specially assigned, the Trial Division has concurrent original jurisdiction, between subject and subject as well as otherwise, in all cases in which a claim for relief is made or a remedy is sought under an Act of Parliament or otherwise in relation to any matter coming within any of the following classes of subjects, namely,                  ( a)      bills of exchange and promissory notes, where the Crown is a party to the proceedings;                  ( b)      aeronautics; and                  ( c)      works and undertakings connecting a province with any other province or extending beyond the limits of a province.