Where the contract of affreightment does not provide otherwise, as between the parties to the contract, in respect of sea damage and its incidents, the law of the country to which the ship belongs must be taken to be the law to which they have submitted themselves. The plaintiff, a British subject, chartered a French ship belonging to French owners, at a Danish West India port, for a voyage from St. Marc, in Hayti, to Havre, London, or Liverpool, at charterer’s option. The charter-party was entered into by the master in pursuance of his general authority as master. The plaintiff shipped a cargo at St. Marc for Liverpool, with which the vessel sailed. On her voyage she sustained sea damage and put into Fayal, a Portuguese port, for repair. There the master properly borrowed money on bottomry of ship, freight, and cargo, and repaired the ship, and she completed her voyage to Liverpool. The bondholder proceeded in the Court of Admiralty against the ship, freight, and cargo. The ship and freight were insufficient to satisfy the bond; and the deficiency with costs fell on the plaintiff as owner of the cargo, for which he sought indemnity against the defendants, the French shipowners. The defendants gave up the ship and – freight to the shipper, so as that, by the alleged law of France, the abandonment absolved them from all further liability on the contract of the master.
Held: that the parties must be taken to have submitted themselves, when making the charter-party, to the French law as the law of the ship, and therefore that, assuming the law of France to be as alleged, the plaintiff’s claim was absolutely barred.
[1865] EngR 750, (1865) 6 B and S 100, (1865) 122 ER 1134, [1865] UKLawRpKQB 30, (1865-1866) LR 1 QB 115
Commonlii, Commonlii
England and Wales
Updated: 12 September 2021; Ref: scu.281662