Reward (Selkrig)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | High Court of Admiralty |
| Judgment Date | 10 March 1818 |
| Date | 10 March 1818 |
English Reports Citation: 165 E.R. 1482
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY
Referred to, In re Dawson Pattisson v. Bathurst, [1915] 1 Ch 630.
[265] '"reward"-(Selkng) March 10, 1818-Condemnation for breach of revenue laws by exportation of logwood from Jamaica, though described and used as dunnage [Referred to, In, re Dawson, Patttsi on v Bathur^t, [1'JloJ 1 Ch 630 ] (Instance Court ) This was the case of a British ship, of the burden of 162 tons, the piopeity of Wentworth Bailey of the island of Jamaica, who, in December 1815, shipped at Port Royal in Jamaica about ten tons of St. Domingo logwood, and twelve tons of Jamaica logwood, with which the vessel sailed on the 14th of that month for Annotto Bay in Jamaica, where she arrived on the 16th, landed a boat full of the logwood, and shipped forty-three hogsheads and three tierces of sugar, and one hundred and eleven puncheons of rum, with which she again sailed from Annotto Bay on the 31st of December, and arrived the day following at Kingston The sugar and ruin were then landed ; but the market proving unfavourable, the whole of the sugar and twenty-nine puncheons of the [266] rum were reshipped, the logwood remaining all the time on board. On the 15th of January 1816, the ship sailed from Port Royal with a clearance for Norfolk in the United States of America, the clearance containing 2bods.mi. the "reward" 148? no mention of the logwood. On the same day she was seized by His Majesty's brig " .Emulous," T. W. Carter, Esq., commander, and brought back to Port Royal, where the ship and logwood were proceeded against in the Vice-Admiralty Court, for a bleach of the revenue laws (particularly of the Statutes 12 Car. 2, 7 & 8 Win. 3, 6 Geo. 3, and 28 Geo. 3), by exporting Jamaica logwood to the United States. The owner at Jamaica gave in a claim alleging that no breach of the revenue laws was contemplated in the exportation of the logwood , that this article was originally put on board at Kingston, as ballast for the voyage to Annotto Bay , that the claimant had given orders, that the logwood should be there landed, and that in fact, a large boat load was so landed, which he believed to have been the Jamaica logwood, as that was the last shipped ; but the weather being bad, and time pressing, the master was unable to land more, and employed the remainder as dunnage, for the purpose of stowing the sugar and rum ; for which purpose it was also kept on board at the time of the reshipment at Kingston, and not being considered as...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
- Kuan Keh Lan and Others; Ong Ah Goh
-
R. v. Syncrude Canada Ltd.
...v. Canadian Pacific Ltd., [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1031; 183 N.R. 325; 82 O.A.C. 243, refd to. [para. 161]. Ship Reward, Re (1818), 2 Dods. 265; 165 E.R. 1482, refd to. [para. R. v. St. Paul (Town) (1993), 150 A.R. 372 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 163]. R. v. T.G. (1990), 102 A.R. 289 (Prov. Ct.), r......
-
Abdoh v. Strata Plan KAS2003, Owners et al.
...Topic 9010 Condominiums - Common property - Actions respecting - See paragraphs 1 to 31. Cases Noticed: Reward, The (1818), 2 Dods. 265; 165 E.R. 1482, refd to. [para. 24]. Ontario v. Canadian Pacific Ltd., [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1031; 183 N.R. 325; 82 O.A.C. 243, refd to. [para. 24]. British Colu......
- Frank v Frank
-
The Prohibited Act, or Actus Reus
...de in the use of criminal law and the need for symmetry between the fault and act requirements. Ibid at paras 57–67. 53 “The Reward” (1818), 165 ER 1482 at 1484. 54 R v Malmo-Levine , [2003] 3 SCR 571, discussed in Chapter 2. 55 For an argument that the doctrine exists under s 8(3) of the C......
-
Table of Cases
...OF CASES “Reward” (The) (1818), 2 Dods 265, 165 ER 1482 ............................................... 105 “Rhone” (The) v “Peter AB Widner” (The), [1993] 1 SCR 497, 101 DLR (4th) 188, 148 NR 349 .......................................................... 261, 264 A (Children) (Conjoined Tw......
-
The Prohibited Act, or Actus Reus
...in the use of criminal law and the need for symmetry between the fault and act requirements. Ibid at paras 57–67. 52 “The Reward” (1818), 165 ER 1482 at 1484. 53 R v Malmo-Levine , [2003] 3 SCR 571, discussed in Chapter 2. CRIMINAL LAW 106 not lightly brand someone with a stigma of a crimin......
-
THE PRESUMPTION OF RESTRAINT AND IMPLICIT LAW.
...Theory of the Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997) at 278. (31) The classic statement may be found in The Reward (1818), 165 ER 1482 at 1484, 2 Dods 263 (HC (32) See e.g. R v McBurney, [1974] 3 WWR 546 at 558, 15 CCC (2d) 361 (BCSC) (suggesting that the minuteness of the qua......
