John F Goulding Pty Ltd v Victorian Railways Commissioners

John F. Goulding Pty Ltd (the appellant) brought an action in detinue against the Victorian Railways Commissioners (the respondents) for the wrongful detention of 55 bales of corn-sacks. The goods had been safely carried by the respondents to their destination but were subsequently delivered to unauthorised persons. The appellant made a demand for the goods more than six months after they were lost but less than six months before commencing the action. The respondents sought to rely on section 200 of the Railways Act 1928 (Vict.), which requires actions against the Commissioners to be commenced within six months of the "act complained of."

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the "act complained of" within the meaning of section 200 of the Railways Act 1928 referred to the initial wrongful delivery or loss of the goods by the respondents, or to their subsequent refusal to deliver the goods upon the appellant's demand. This question determined whether the appellant's action was commenced within the statutory time limit.

The High Court held that the "act complained of" in section 200 refers to the cause of action sued upon. The Court reasoned that, notwithstanding the prior loss of the goods, a new cause of action in detinue arose upon the respondents' failure to deliver the goods when demanded by the appellant. This principle, which was approved and followed from *Wilkinson v. Verity*, establishes that a bailee's wrongful parting with goods does not necessarily extinguish the bailor's right to sue in detinue upon a subsequent demand and refusal, and that the bailor retains the election to sue either for the wrongful act or for the breach of duty upon demand. The Court found that the appellant had elected to sue for the latter.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, reversing the decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The Court ordered that judgment be entered for the appellant for the value of the goods, plus costs.