Domett and Others against Beckford
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1833 |
| Date | 01 January 1833 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 110 E.R. 883
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
S. C. 2 N. & M. 374; 3 L. J. K. B. 11.
[521] domett and others against beckford. 1833. In indebitatus assumpsit for freight, it appeared that goods were laden in Jamaica on board the plaintiffs' ship, according to a bill of lading, which stated them to have been shipped by W. J. on a vessel bound for London on account of the defendant, and that they were to be delivered in London to the consignees, paying freight for the same at the rate therein mentioned ; the goods so shipped were the property of the defendant. The captain having delivered the goods to the consignees without receiving the freight, it was held that the defendant was liable by law to pay the freight to the shipowners; and that independently of any express contract by charterparty. O^sp- t-X./3* [S. C. 2 N. & M. 374; 3 L. J. K. B. 11.] Indebitatus assumpsit for freight, primage, and pierage, due from the defendant to the plaintiffs, in respect of the carriage of certain goods and merchandize mentioned in the declaration. Plea, general issue. At the trial before Denman C.J., at the London sittings after Trinity term 1833, the following facts were admitted:-"The goods mentioned in the declaration were shipped in the island of Jamaica on board the ship ' William Bryan,' belonging to the plaintiffs, according to the following bill of lading:-'Shipped, in good order and well conditioned, by W. Jackson, in the ship "William Bryan "bound for London, 145 hogsheads of sugar and forty-eight puncheons of rum, on account of W. Beckford, Esq., being marked and numbered as in the margin, and are to be delivered at the West India Docks in the port of London (with the usual risks expressly exeepted), unto Messrs. Plummer and Wilson, or to their assigns, paying freight for the said sugar at 5s. sterling per hundred weight, and rum at 6d. sterling per imperial gallon, with primage and average accustomed.' The arrival of the ship was reported on the 30th of August 1830, and a freight note for 6221. 10s. 4d. (which was admitted to be the just amount of the freight, primage, and pierage, payable for the shipment and carriage of the goods) was, on that day, delivered by the agents of the plaintiffs, who reported the ship to Plummer and Wilson, the consignees named in the bill of lading. The goods were the property of the [522] defendant, and were shipped and consigned by W. Jackson, his attorney in Jamaica...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cho Yang Shipping Company Ltd v Coral (UK) Ltd
...is that of the person with whom the performing carrier has contracted to carry the goods. This person is normally the shipper. ( Domett v Beckford 5 B & Ad 521) But the shipper may be shipping as the agent of the consignee in which case the contract will be with the consignee. (eg Fragano v......
-
Sanders, Snow and Cockings against Vanzeller
...party in each of those cases; under seal in the latter case, but not in the former. The same rule was adhered to in Domett v. Beckford (5 B & Ad. 521), where there was no charter party at all; and it appears to be taken for granted in Ward v. Felton (1 East, 507). If, therefore, Moorsom v. ......
-
Trueman and against Others against Loder
...following authorities, besides those mentioned in the judgment, were referred to. Thomson v. Davenport, 9 B. & C. 78; Domett v. Beckford, 5 B. & Ad. 521 ; Champion v. Plummer, 1 N. R. 252 ; Hawes v. Forster, 1 Moo. & E. 368 ; Thornton v. Mtux, Moo. & M. 43; Magee v. Atkinson, 2 M. & W. 440;......
-
Fowler v Knoop
...Q.B.; 3 Mar. Law O.S. 190.468. Maclachlan on Shipping p. 373. Cohen, Q.C., and Wood Hill, for plaintiff, referred to. Domett v. Beckwith, 5 B. & Ad. 521; Hill v. Idle, 4 Camp. 327; Fraser v. The Telegram Company, 1 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 421; 27 L. T. Rep. N. S. 373; L. Rep. 7Q.B.566; The argum......