The court was asked whether shipowners could recover under a sue and labour clause in a freight policy for the costs of transhipment expended in order to avoid the loss of the freight. There had been no abandonment and underwriters argued that this was fatal to the claim.
Held: Willes J said: ‘As to the second head, – whether the occasion upon which the expenses were incurred was such as to be within the suing and labouring clause, – this depends upon the true answer to the question so thoroughly discussed in the course of the argument, viz. whether the clause ought to be limited in construction to a case where the assured abandons, or may perchance abandon, so that the expense incurred is not only in respect of a subject-matter in which the underwriters are interested, but upon property which, by the abandonment, actually becomes, or may become, theirs, or whether it extends to every case in which the subject of insurance is exposed to loss or damage for the consequences of which the underwriters would be answerable, and in warding off which labour is expended. In the former construction the clause is inapplicable to the present case; in the latter it is applicable, and the assured is entitled to contribution.’
Judges:
Willes J
Citations:
(1866) LR 1 CP 535
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd and Another v M/V ‘Saldanha’ C/P Dated 25/06/08 ComC 11-Jun-2010
The court considered the effect of a ship being taken by pirates at sea on the obligations in the charterparty contract. The insurers said that a claim for ‘average accident’ must include an element of physical damage – absent in this case.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport
Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.416715
