Unspeaking adjudication order fails where statutory pleas on ship stores and salvage equipment are not addressed, leading to remand.

An adjudication order was found unsustainable because it failed to deal with the appellants' specific pleas that consumables and spares fell within the ship-stores provisions and that the mechanical grab formed part of the salvage barge. The authority had proceeded as though duty liability on those items was uncontested, without examining the statutory contentions or giving reasons addressing civil consequences. The order was therefore treated as unspeaking and was set aside. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and the issues of confiscation and penalty were left open for reconsideration on remand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order could be sustained where the authority did not deal with the plea that consumables and spares were covered by the ship-stores provisions and that the mechanical grab formed part of the salvage barge, and whether the matter had to be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The appellants had specifically relied on the statutory treatment of ship stores and had asserted that the consumables remained on board the vessel and that the mechanical grab was an integral part of the barge used for salvage operations. The order under challenge did not address these specific contentions and proceeded on the basis that the duty liability on the consumables and the mechanical grab was uncontested. Since the relevant statutory pleas were not examined, the order lacked the reasoning expected of an adjudication determining civil consequences.

Conclusion: The order was held to be unspeaking and was set aside. The matters were remanded for fresh adjudication after giving the appellants a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and the questions of confiscation and penalty were left open for decision in the remand proceedings.

---