"Empire Brent."
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1948 |
| Date | 1948 |
| Year | 1948 |
| Court | Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
7 cases
-
Nautical Challenge Ltd (Claimant 131 Defendant 017 "Alexandra 1 Interests") v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd (Defendant 131 Claimant 017 "Ever Smart Interests")
...(1886) 11 PD 117, The Kaiser Wilhelm Der Grosse [1907] P.36 and 259, The Treherbert [1933] 47 Ll.L. Rep. 274, The Empire Brent (1948) 81 Ll. L. Rep. 306, The Canberra Star [1962] 1 Lloyd's Rep.24, The Glenfalloch [1979] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 247, Kulemesin v HKSAR [2013] 16 HKCFA 195 and The Nordl......
-
Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd v Nautical Challenge Ltd (THE 'ALEXANDRA 1' and 'EVER SMART')
...Concordia, The (1866) LR 1 A & E 93. Corcrest v Ulrikka (1922) 13 Ll L Rep 367. Dona Myrto [1959] 1 Ll Rep 203. Empire Brent, The (1948) 81 Ll L Rep 306. Fothergill v Monarch Airlines Ltd [1981] AC 251. Gard Marine and Energy Ltd v China National Chartering Co Ltd (The Ocean Victory) [2017]......
-
Nautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd
...narrow channel rule and the crossing rule applied to EVER SMART. I was influenced, as I thought Willmer J. in The Empire Brent [1948] 81 Lloyd's Law Reports 306 and Lord Clarke in The Kulemesin had been, by the consideration that the crossing rule was capable of imposing obligations upon EV......
-
Kulemesin Yuriy And Another v Hksar
...rule but by the narrow channel rule. At her para 401 the Judge quoted this passage from the judgment of Willmer J in The Empire Brent (1948) 81 Ll L Rep 306 at “As I understand the principles which apply in narrow channels. It has been laid down for many, many, years that although the cross......
Request a trial to view additional results