Berens v Rucker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1779 |
| Date | 01 January 1779 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 96 E.R. 175
COURTS OF WESTMINSTER-HALL
berkns v. kucker. Insurers liable to pay the charge of a compromise bona fide made to prevent the ship from being condemned as lawful prize, or to avoid a greater expence. Action on a policy of insurance, dated 21st July, 1758, on a Dutch ship called the " Tyd," and its cargo, at and from St. Eustatius to Amsterdam ;-warranted a Dutch ship and the goods Dutch property, and not laden in any French port in the West Indies. The cargo was worth 12,0001., and was insured at fifteen guineas per cent.; for, though the common premium before the French War was but three guineas per cent., yet it was thus advanced, by the number of captures, which the English had made of neutral vessels, on suspicion of illicit trade, and the detention of these vessels by the proceedings in the Courts of Admiralty. The defendant underwrote 821. of the plaintiffs, for a premium of 121. 18s. 3|d. In May, 1758, the ship was at St. Eustatius taking in her cargo, which consisted of sugar and indigo, and other French commodities, which were put on board her, partly out of barks from sea, partly from the shore of the island. The 18th of June, 1758, she sailed on her voyage: 27th of June was taken by an English privateer: 28th June was carried into Portsmouth. On the 1st of August, the sailors were 176 TRINITY TERM, 1 GEO. III. K. B. l BLACK. W. 314. examined upon the standing interrogatories, prescribed by stat. 29 G. 2, c. 34, and the captain entered his claim in the Admiralty Court. [314] In October, 1758, the claimants were cited to specify, what part of the goods were taken from the shore of St. Eustatius, and what from the barks. Citation continued from Court to Court, till February, 1759. The 24th of February, 1759, interlocutory decree was pronounced for the contumacy of the claimants, in not specifying what parts of the cargo were so taken, and that therefore the goods should be presumed French property. Appeal to Lords Commissioners of Prizes. Many causes stood before it. The market was very high. The cargo in part was perishable. Wherefore the agent of the owners agreed with the captors, to give them 8001. and costs, to obtain a reversal of the sentence. The reversal was had by consent; and in order to give costs to the captors, it was decreed by consent, that there was a sufficient cause for seizure ò and thereupon costs were decreed to the captors; and restitution of the cargo to the owners...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Royal Boskalis Westminster N.v v Mountain
...Affievedo -v- Cambridge where the redemption (ransom) was recoverable from underwriters, that being a case before the Ransom Acts. 32In Berens -v- Rucker 1 Black 813 it was held that where a capture was made, whether lawful or not, the insurers were liable for the charges of a compromise ma......
-
Keating v New Ireland Assurance Company Plc
...INSURANCE CO 1908 2 KB 863 ZURICH GENERAL INSURANCE CO V MORRISON 1942 1 AER 529 ANDERSON V FITZGERALD 1853 4 HLC 484 ROSS V BRADSHAW 1 BLACK W 313 MACDONALD V LAW UNION 1874 9 QB 238 REID & CO V EMPLOYERS" ACCIDENT 1898 SC 1031 1 Judgment of McCarthy J.,delivered the 6th day of December ......