CO129-606-6 Hong Kong Loan- Financial settlement 7-3-1949 - 23-12-1949 — Page 60

58

Х

In margine not against end para.)

to the value of the vessel immediately before the

me

occurance

In

ance of the damage that caused the loss.

the case of vehicles and aircraft there is the

proviso that no compensation would be payable

unless it could be shown that at the time when the

loss or damage occurred, the risk to the vehicle

or aircraft arising in consequence of war

operations was materially increased by reason of

the requisition. It is not clear why vessels are

not mentioned in this proviso and one can only

assume that this proviso does not cover vessels

and that therefore compensation of value of the

vessels would be payable in any case of a loss

whilst under requisition irrespective of the

cause of the loss. In the last sentence of

paragraph 3 (a) of Allen's report, he says that

the legal liabilities of Hong Kong Government in

these cases has been admitted by the Hong Kong

Attorney-General and is not open to doubt. I

assume paragraph 3 (b) of the report refers to

cases where there was no formal requisitioning.

theeling 4. The initial liability in making any

Igre not already been) legally proved claims which are not met by the

be conses thaky Lane) United Kingdom/Departments as being outside the

scope of claims normally accepted by them, must

presumably rest on the Hong Kong Government, but that raises the question of the extent to which

the United Kingdom Service Department should

morally be asked to contribute towards the

expenditure involved. Allen in his report

V.K

The

paragraph 5 (e) suggests as a basis that/Hong Kong Government should bear 35% and the Service

Departments 65%. tment

imagine

The Service Departments however

against

would, cabally, be adverse to making contributions

on that basis.

Nevertheless if we take the

maximum amount of the claims as $25 million

/see

Page 60Page 61