Blad v Bamfield
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1674 |
| Date | 01 January 1674 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 36 E.R. 992
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
blad v. bamfield. In Chancery. -21 st November, 20 Car. 2, 1074. Perpetual injunction to restrain proceedings against a Dane, for tlie seizure of property of English subjects in Iceland, the seizure being sanctionsd by the Danish, authorities. The case of Peter Blad, a subject of Denmark, against Bamfield and Others, came now to be heard (of which see the beginning before at the council board (see the preceding case [and note])), and the scope of the suit was to stay several actions commenced at law in trespass and trover, for seizing certain [605] goods of the Defendants for trading in Iceland, contrary to certain privileges claimed there by the Plaintiff and others. The Defendants insisted that tins was no cause of state, and was ergo dismissed from the council table; that the injuries they had suffered were great, and such as were done with gome kind of affront to and contempt of the English nation ; that they had a most undoubted right of trade in Iceland, and by the articles of peace with Denmark, were to use their commerce with the subjects of Denmark without molestation ; that if the King of Denmark had granted any patents of privilege contrary to the freedom of trade, they were illegal, and a breach of the treaty in question ; and if the patents were of ancienter date, they had been dispensed with by the contrary practice, which had suffered English to trade there, and so invited the Defendants ; that, however, the Plaintiff had already had all the benefit of this Court which he could reasonably expect, for he obtained an injunction till he had examined his witnesses, and now having perfected his proofs, whatever could avail him here, would also avail him at law ; wherefore they prayed leave, that now, at last, they might go to their trial at law. I said never was any cause more properly before the Court than the case in question ; first, as it relates to a trespass done upon the high sea, which though it may seem to belong to the cognisance of the admiral, yet I took this occasion to show that the Court of Chancery hath always had an admiral jurisdiction, not only per viam appellationis, but per viam evocationis too, and may send for any cause out of the Admiralty to determine it here ; of which there are many precedents in Not/'s MSS. 88 ; and in my little book, in the preface, de offlcio Cancellarii, sect. 18 ; and in my parchment book in [606] octavo, tit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buttes Gas and Oil Company v Hammer; Buttes Gas and Oil Company v Hammer (No. 3)
....... . 64 The first trace of it is in the seventeenth century Blad's case (1673-4) 3 Swans. 602 , 607. The record of the decision from Lord Nottingham's manuscript contains this passage: ".. the ......
-
Nevsun Resources Ltd v Araya,
...a central issue is whether a foreign state has violated its obligations under international law. 287. Blad v. Bamfield(1674), 3 Swans 604, 36 ER 992, may be the earliest case regarding this branch of the act of state doctrine. A Danish man, Blad, had seized property of English subjects (inc......
-
Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5
...2014 SCC 62, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 176; considered: Belhaj v. Straw, [2017] UKSC 3, [2017] A.C. 964; Blad v. Bamfield (1674), 3 Swans. 604, 36 E.R. 992; Duke of Brunswick v. King of Hanover (1848), 2 H.L.C. 1, 9 E.R. 993; Yukos Capital sarl v. OJSC Rosneft Oil Co. (No. 2), [2012] EWCA Civ 855, [2......
-
Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company and Another
...Cuba v Sabbatino (1964) 376 US 398. BBMB Finance (Hong Kong) Ltd v EDA Holdings LtdWLR [1990] 1 WLR 409. Blad v Bamfield (1674) 3 Swan 604; 36 ER 992. Boys v ChaplinELR [1971] AC 356. Brandeis Goldschmidt & Co Ltd v Western Transport LtdELR [1981] QB 864. Brunswick (Duke of) v King of Hanov......
-
Foreign sovereign immunity in the caribbean: a case for legislative intervention
...Central Leather Co., 246 U.S. 297 (1918)). 245. Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 Can LII 37919 (Can. S.C.C.). 246. Blad v. Bamfield (1674) 36 ER 992, 3 Swans 604, 606–07 (Den.). 94 [Vol. 53 FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY IN THE CARIBBEAN and different in law, and because of the large numbe......
-
List of cases
...Ott, The [1990] 3 NZLR 715, see also General Bills Ltd v The Ship Betty OttBetty Ott, The [1992] 1 NZLR 655Blad v Bamfield (1674) 36 ER 992Bold Buccleugh, The (1851) 7 Moo PC 267, see also Hamer v BellBologna Brothers v Mike T Morrissey and Elizabeth M Morrissey 154 So 2d 455 (1963)Boreal ......
-
The early English Admiralty Court and the conceptualisation of the maritime lien : an historical conspectus
...Remedial Powers of the Admiralty” (1933) 43 Yale Law Journal 1 at 10 and 11. See also Denew v Stock (1677) 36 ER 1013; Blad v Bamfield (1674) 36 ER 992; R v Carew (1682) 36 ER 1016; Duncan v M’Calmont (1841) 49 ER 161; Glascott v Lang (1838) 40 ER 1000.51 Because the common law courts were......
-
Edward John Eyre and the conflict of laws.
...CJ refers to this case (though not by name) in Mostyn v Fabrigas (1775) 1 Cowp 161, 180-1; 98 ER 1021, 1031 2. (159) (1674) 3 Swans 604; 36 ER 992. See also the earlier proceedings in the Privy Council: Blad's Case (1673) 3 Swans 603; 36 ER (160) Alexander N Sack, 'Conflicts of Laws in the ......