Hogarth and Others v Cory Brothers and Company
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 26 July 1926 |
| Date | 26 July 1926 |
| Court | Privy Council |
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
Lords Haldane, Dunedin, Atkinson, Phillimore, and Carson
Hogarth and others v. Cory Brothers and Co.
Ashcroft v. Crow Orchard Colliery CompanyDID=ASPM 2 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 397 31 L. T. Rep. 266 L. Rep. 9 Q. B., 540
Postlethwaite v. FreelandDID=ASPMELR 4 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 302 42 L. T. Rep., at p. 851 5 App. Cas., at p. 622
United States Shipping Board v. Frank C. Strick and Co. Limited ante, p. 40 135 L. T. Rep. 185 (1926) A. C. 545
The Vergottis v. William Cory and Son LimitedELR ante, p. 71 135 L. T. Rep. 254 (1926) 2 K. B. 344
Bengal — Ship — Charter-party
ASPINALL'S MARITIME LAW CASES. 175 PRIV. CO.] HOGARTH AND OTHERS V. CORY BROTHERS AND CO. . [PRIV. CO. Judicial Committee of the Pribe Council. Juno 17, 21, 25., 24 and July 26,1926. (Present: Lords HALDANE, DUNEDIN, ATKINSON, PUILLIMORE, and CARSON.) HOGARTH AND *** V. CORY BROTHERS AND CO. (a) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT AT FORT WILLIAM. Bengal - Ship -- Charter-party-Duty of charterer to supply cargo - Vessel not allowed to come to loading berth until a reasonable part of cargo ready-Damages for detention of vessel-Exception in charter-party -"Government regulations and restrictions" -Effect on local regulations made by port authorities. If a ship is prevented from getting to a loading berth owing to at: obstacle created by the charterer, or in performing his duty, *** has then done all that is needful to *** the ship to the loading place and the charterer must pay for the subsequent delay. It is the charterer's duty to have a reasonable portion of the cargo on the quayside ready to be shipped and to be in a position to supply the *** as and when it is required, and if by reason of the charterer not having a reasonable portion ready the dock authorities will not allow the ship to come to the berth, the charterer is liable to pay damages for the detention of the vessel. An exception in a charter-party of "Government regulations and restrictions .... affecting the normal shipment of the cargo" does nut include local regulations made by the port authorities and affecting the time or manner of loading in the port. APPEAL from a decision of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal (Greaves and Chakravarti, JJ.), reversing in part and affirming in part the decision of Buckland, J. at the trial. There was also a cross-appeal. The facts appear fully from their Lordships' judgment. Le Quesne, K.C and Sir Robert Aske for the shipowners. A. T. Miller. K.C., Norman Birkett, K.C. an' D. N. Pritt for the charterers. The considered opinion of their Lordships was delivered by Lord PHILL***.-In this action both plaintiffs and defendants are appealing from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. The appeal of the plaintiffs-*** and others-was preferred before *** of the defendants-Copy and Co.-and the latter (a) Reported by EDWARD J. M. ***, Barrister Law. is therefore treated as a cross-appeal; but historically the subject of the defendants' appeal comes first and will be taken first in this judgment. The plaintiff are owners of the steamship Baron Ardrossan, and they on the 31st July 1920 entered into a charter-party with Messrs. Graham and Co., of London, acting as agents for the defendants. By this charter-party this steamship was to receive on board at Calcutta, "at such dock, place or wharf as charterers; may direct, lying always afloat, from the said charterers or their order, a full and complete cargo of coal in bulk, which cargo the said charterers bind themselves to ship, or cause to be shipped," and to proceed with all possible despatch to Colombo, where she was to deliver the cargo. The charter-party contained many of the usual provisions and exceptions which need not be here specified. The important ones for the purpose of this case are clauses 3,11,12, 13, 22, 24, 25, which are as follows : "(3) In the event of war, or disturbances, or strikes, lock-outs, or stoppage of labour, from whatever cause, or pestilence, or epidemical sickness, or earthquakes, fires, storms or floods, or the failure on the part of the railways to supply wagons, or detention by railways, or other hindrances beyond the control of suppliers affecting the working of this contract, suppliers shall not be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sociedad Financiera de Bienes Raices S.A. v Agrimpex Hungarian Trading Company for Agricultural Products; The Aello
...of the dock authority, the charterers broke their contract, and are liable to pay the agreed damages". 107 Hogarth and Others v. Cory Brothers and Company, Limited, 1926 32 Com. Cas. 174, was the case of a ship under charterparty to load coal at Calcutta on a berth charter. The ship arrive......