Petrol was shipped in London on the Argos under a bill of lading to deliver at Le Havre. It arrived in the later stages of the Franco-Prussian war, when the port was full of munitions, and the landing of flammable cargoes was forbidden. The master therefore discharged the petroleum into lighters in the outer harbour. The shippers (who had retained the bill of lading) might have taken immediate delivery and transported it on, but they did not present the bill of lading or make arrangements to receive it. Having waited for as long as the port authorities would allow him to, the master reshipped the cargo and carried it back to London. The owners sued the shippers for freight for the return voyage.
Held: The claim succeeded. The contract of carriage was at an end when the Argos left Le Havre for London, either because the contractual service had been completed or because the contract was frustrated at Le Havre: ‘not merely is a power given, but a duty is cast on the master in many cases of accident and emergency to act for the safety of the cargo, in such manner as may be best under the circumstances in which it may be placed; and that, as a correlative right, he is entitled to charge its owner with the expenses properly incurred in so doing . . In a case like the present, where the goods could neither be landed nor remain where they were, it seems to be a legitimate extension of the implied agency of the master to hold that, in the absence of all advices, he had authority to carry or send them on to such other place as in his judgment, prudently exercised, appeared to be most convenient for their owner; and if so, it will follow from established principles that the expenses properly incurred may be charged to him . . The authority of the master being founded on necessity would not have arisen if he could have obtained instructions from the defendant or his assignees. But under the circumstances this was not possible.’
Sir James W Colville, Sir Barnes Peacock, Sir Montague Smith, Sir Robert P Collier
[1873] UKPC 15, (1873-74) LR 5 PC 134
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Brown v Gaudet (The Ex Cargo Argos) PC 30-May-1873
(High Court of Admiralty) . .
Cited – Petroleo Brasileiro Sa v Ene Kos 1 Ltd (‘The MT Kos’) SC 2-May-2012
The MT Kos had been chartered by the appellants. The respondents failed to make payments, and notice was given to withdraw the vessel. The contract said that such a notice was without prejudice to any claim. At the time, the vessel was laden. The . .
Cited – Great Northern Railway Co v Swaffield CEchC 22-Apr-1874
Mr Swaffield sent his horse by railway to a station at Sandy. The horse arrived late at night, and the railway company lodged the horse overnight for their own account at a livery stable. Mr Swaffield failed to collect it on the following morning. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.418981
