Pickford LJ rationalised the relation between a state and the crew of a requisitioned vessel as being one of forced hiring.
Bankes LJ said: ‘The position is, I think, quite clearly indicated in the passage from Clerke [Praxis Curiae Admiralitatis], cited with approval by Jeune J (sic). in The Dictator … where the writer says that after appearance the case proceeds ‘ut in actione instituta contra personam debitoris’ – that is to say, that the action is to proceed as if, but only as if, it was an action in personam. The advantage of the action being an action in rem still remains in the sense that, should the exceptional occasion arise, the Court in a proper case would no doubt still have jurisdiction to order the arrest of the vessel.’
Judges:
Pickford LJ, Bankes LJ
Citations:
[1916] P 64
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Compania Naviera Vascongado v Steamship ‘Cristina’ HL 1938
A state-owned ship that was used for public purposes could not be made the subject of proceedings in rem. Lord Atkin described the absolute immunity of a sovereign of a foreign state within this jurisdiction: ‘The foundation for the application to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport, Employment, Litigation Practice
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.644060
