"La Madonna Della Lettera."
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 July 1829 |
| Date | 27 July 1829 |
| Court | High Court of Admiralty |
English Reports Citation: 166 E.R. 249
HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY
[289] "LA madonna della lettera." July 27, 1829.-The High Court of Admiralty declined, on the application of the claimant, and without letters of request, to interfere to enforce a monition to compel obedience to a decree made many years before by a Vice-Admiralty Court, for payment of a small sum as demurrage, against a captain who had ceased to be within the jurisdiction of the latter Court, and was resident in England This was an application, on the part of a claimant in the Vice-Admiralty Court at Malta, to enforce a decree of that Court against the captor, who had ceased to be within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court at Malta, but was living in England. The monition was moved for on the authority of The " Picimento," 4 C. Rob. 360; and was granted under an intimation noticed in the judgment. Lushington for Capt. Bligh. 250 "la madonna della lettera " 2 hacks. 290 Addams, contra. Judgment-Sir Christopher Robinson : In this case there are two questions,- one affecting the jurisdiction and authority of this Court to enforce the monition ; the other relating to the equity of the demand. When the monition was moved for, the Court observed upon the doubtful character of such proceeding, and allowed its process to issue, in order that the experiment might be tried, and research be made for authorities to support such an interference by this Court in the proceedings of an inferior Court The distinction between the case cited, and the present, was then pointed out In The ' Picimento," this Court only proceeded to do justice in a case partially adjudicated by the Vice-Admiralty Court of the Cape of Good Hope, which was suppressed, and had left other parts undetermined or unexecuted. The jurisdiction of the local [290] Court being extinguished, the general authority of this Court revived, and was proper to be maintained to prevent a total failure of justice In the present case there is no such reason for the interference of this Court. It might depend on many particulars of a local nature whether the sentence would in this case have been enforced at Malta. Circumstances of defence or exculpation might have arisen there which cannot be within the reach or application of this Court It is not even an impossible supposition, that the proper Court may even now be adjudicating on the subject, or may have decided it, if it should have happened that the captor had come...
To continue reading
Request your trial