Boston Fruit Company v British and Foreign Marine Insurance Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 May 1906 |
| Date | 21 May 1906 |
| Court | House of Lords |
House of Lords
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, Robertson, and Atkinson
Boston Fruit Company v. British and Foreign Marine Insurance Company
Clough v. London and North-Western Railway CompanyENR 25 L. T. Rep. 708 L. Rep. 7 Ex. 26
Keighley, Maxsted, and Co. v. Durant 84 L. T. Rep. 777 (1901) A. C. 240
Marine insurance — Policy effected by agents of owner — Right of charterer to sue on policy
260 MARITIME LAW CASES. H. of L.] Boston Fruit Co. v. British & Foreign Marine Insurance Co. [H. of L. HOUSE OF LORDS. Feb. 23, 26, 27, March 1, and May 21,1906. (Before the Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, robertson, and Atkinson.) Boston Fruit Company v. British and Foreign Marine Insurance Company. (a) ON APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ENGLAND. Marine inturance - Policy effected by agents of owner - Right of charterer to sue on policy. The appellants chartered the ship B. The charter-party, which amounted to a demise of the ship, was made between C. and Sons, " as agents for the owners," and the appellants, and provided that the owners :,should pay for the insurance on the ship. A policy of insurance was effected on the ship by insurance brokers on the instructions of C. and Sons, who were the agents of the owners, " as well in their own name as for and in the name and names of all and every other person or persons to whom the subject-matter of this policy does or may or shall appertain in part or in all." The name of the appellants was not mentioned in the policy. The policy was a valued policy, and contained a collision clause. During the continuance of the policy the B. came into collision with another ship, and the appellants were compelled to pay damages to the owners of the other ship. Held (affirming the judgment of the court below), that the appellants were not entitled to sue on the policy, there being no evidence that it was effected on their behalf, or that they were within the contemplation of the parlies at the time when it was made. Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal (Vaughun Williams, Romer, and Stirling, L.J J.), repotted 10 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 37; 92 L. T. Rep. 514; (1905) 1 K. B. 637, affirming a judgment of Bigham, J. at the trial of the action. By a charter-party dated the 10th March 1893, and made between Messrs. B. Craggs and Sons, described therein as agents for the owners and the appellants, the appellants chartered the Barnstable, then being built by Messrs. B. Craggs, for thirty-six calendar months from March 1894. By a policy dated the 4th April 1895 Messrs. (a) Reported by C. E MALDEN, Esq. Barrister-at-Law. John Holman and Sons, on the instructions of Messrs. B. Craggs and Sons, effected an insurance with the respondents on the Barnstable on a valuation of 19.000l. for the amount of 2500l. for the period of twelve calendar months from the 2l8t March 1895 at a premium of 82. per cent There was a running down clause attached to the policy. On the 13th Jan. 1896 the Barnstable came into collision with a ship called the Fortuna, and the Fortuna was sunk. The collision was caused by the negligence of the master and crew of the Barnstable. On the 15 th Jan. 1896 the owners of the Fortuna instituted a suit against the Barnstable in a District Court of the United States of America, holden at Boston, claiming damages in respect of the collision. On the petition of the owners of the Barnstable the appellants as charterers were made parties to the suit. At the hearing the liability of the Barnstable was admitted, and the damages recoverable were agreed at sums amounting to 14,575 dollars, with interest at 6 per cent, from the let Jan 1897. The suit thenceforward proceeded as an independent cause between the appellants and the owners of the Barnstable, to determine which as between them was the party liable to nay the damages. This question was determined in the appellants' favour by the District Court, and by the Circuit Court of Appeals, but in the owners' favour by the Supreme Court of the United States. The amount which the appellants thus became liable to pay, including interest, was 19,901.19 dollars. This sum the appellants paid on the 3rd Nov. 1902. The charterers then brought the present action against the underwriters to recover a due proportion of this sum under the policy. Carver, K.C. and A. Llewelyn Davits, lot the appellants. - The appellants are entitled to recover, on the policy as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
(1) Nelista Rambally individually and as personally representative of the Estate of Hezekiah Rambally (2) Rudolph Rambally (3) Sieana Rambally Claimants v (1) Barbados Fire and General Insurance Company Ltd (2) Thomas Jean (3) Thomas M. Jean Insurance Brokerage Ltd Defendants [ECSC]
...which the policy covers there is force in Lord Atkinson's remarks in Boston Fruit Co.-vs-British and Foreign Marine Insurance Co. Ltd. [ [1906] A.C. 336, 343; 22 T.L.R. 571, H.L.]. "Under the old authorities the governing factor in determining the person or class of persons who came within ......
- TTMI Sarl v Statoil ASA (The "Sibohelle")
-
Tomlinson (A.) (Hauliers) Ltd v Hepburn
...can extend or narrow the interest which the policy covers there is force in Lord Atkinson's remarks in the Boston Fruit Company case [1906] 1 A.C. 336 at page 343: "Under the old authorities the governing factor in determining the person or class of persons who came within such a clause, or......
-
Samuel (P.) & Company Ltd v Dumas
... ... on the same day she was removed from the British register and received a provisional certificate ... the appellant company, to see that this insurance was effected. Anghelatos also desired Mr. Wheler ... and machinery of the "Grigorios" against marine risks in a sum of 110,000 l ... for a period of 12 ... in its popular sense) into contact with a foreign body, which penetrates it and causes a leak, is a ... ...