In Matrix Europe Ltd and another v Uniserve Holdings Ltd and others – Butterworths Law Direct 14.1.08 goods delivered to the second Defendant had been stolen when its premises were burgled. The Claimant owner of the goods commenced proceedings for the loss against the second and third Defendants. The second Defendant commenced Part 20 proceedings against the third Defendant, a freight handling company.

The dispute concerned the terms of the bailment to the second Defendant in circumstances when the third Defendant did not intend to deliver the goods to it, and in particular whether the delivery of the consignment was subject to the standard terms of the British International Freight Association, to which both parties belonged.

It was found on the facts that although the third Defendant did not intend to deliver the goods to the second Defendant the second Defendant had intended to accept the delivery of the goods. It was held that if there was some sort of umbrella agreement between the Defendants on BIFA terms then such terms could apply even where there was an unintended delivery, and the court would be willing to manipulate the wording of the BIFA terms to give effect to the parties’ bargain.

victim in respect of the criminal proceedings brought against the crew, and because the cargo had been released.