*This is a group forum, so I need a short reply that might contain a question about my colleague's judgment of the case.* cheers.

Classification of Law: _________Private law (Property law)__________

Parties: Plaintiff: _________ Clancy's Cars Ltd__________

Defendant: ____Railco Ltd_____

Type of Court: _______Provincial Superior Court_______

Case Facts:

Clancy's Cars Ltd

They engaged Railco Ltd to transport some motor vehicles from Montreal to Halifax. When the day of delivering to the plaintiff, the vehicles were already damaged due to the storm. They claimed damages.

Railco Ltd

They accepted the plaintiffs order to deliver some motor vehicles from Montreal to Halifax. Before the contract is done, the storm hit the Halifax and the vehicles were damaged even though those were parked in an area for safekeeping.

Case / Issue (sue for): _______________Damage to property________________

Judgment / Decision: ________________Not liable_________________

Reasons:

Although it will be bad news for the plaintiff, the bailee would not be liable owing to the damage by act of GOD. Meanwhile, the loss and damage of their motor vehicles could be covered by insurance in some situations.

Remedies: No damages

Who is responsible for the damage to the vehicles?

In short, nobody is responsible in this case. The defendants carelessness will result in negligence and be responsible, but in this case, Railco Ltd has taken adequate measures for such circumstance as the storm and then the judgement of liable seems distant.