The "Columbus"
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 March 1849 |
| Date | 09 March 1849 |
| Court | High Court of Admiralty |
English Reports Citation: 166 E.R. 922
HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY
S. C 6 Notes of Cas 671. Referred to, The "Clyde," 1856, Swab 24. Commented on, The "Ramne," [1906] P 277. Referred to, The "Philadelphia," [1917] 3 P. WMS. 110
i the " columbus " March 9 1849 - Where a vessel is sunk in a collision, and com- ^ ensation is awarded by the ('curt of Admiralty to the full value of the vessel "f or a total loss, the plaintift will not be entitled to recover anything in the ^f, i h **- 35~*. nature of a demurrage for loss of the employment of his vessel or las own earn- ings in consequence of the collision [S. C 6 Notes of Gas 671. Referred to, The " Clyde" 1856, Swab 24. Com- mented on, The " Ratine," [1906] P 277. Referred to, The " Philadelphia," [1917] P. LIO] This was originally a cause of damage by collision, brought by the owners of the fishing smack the " Tryall," against tins vessel, &c The collision took place otT Dungeness upon the [159] 17th of June 1847, and in consequence of the damage she had sustained the smack was sunk Befoie the proceedings were commenced m the Court of Admiralty, the smack was raised at the expense of the owner of the " Columbus, ' and was carried into Rye harbour, and notice thereof was given to the agent of the owner, with an intimation that the owner of the " Columbus " was ready to deliver up the same, and that he would not be responsible for any further damage or expense that might be incurred by her remaining unrepaired in the harbour of Rye No notice was taken of this intimation ; and on the 1'Jth of July 1847, a suit was commenced by the owner of the smack in the Court of Admiralty Upon the 22nd of July 1848, the cause was heard on the merits before Trinity Masters, and they being of opinion that the " Columbus " was solely to blame, the Court pronounced for the damage, and decreed a reference in the usual form to the Registrar and merchants to report thereupon The Registrar and merchants reported the sum of £310 to be due to Mr Woodward in full of all demands as for the entire loss of his vessel, and rejected his claim to the sum of £89, which he stated he would have earned for wages as master of the smack, and £75 which he claimed as the average profits of the same from the time of the collision This report was now objected to In objection to the report on behalf of the owner of the smack, Addanis submitted - That by the principles which governed the Court's proceedings in this class of cases, the owner of the smack was entitled to a restttutio in inteqmm, and [160] this principle the registrar had departed trom in making the limited compensation which he had awarded That as master and owner of the smack the plaintiff in the collision in question had been altogether deprived of more than twelve months' use and profits of his vessel These together would have amounted to £164, and to this further sum he was entitled, otherwise lie would be still a loser to that extent, and the compensation would not be perfect ; that in The " (ftizelle,'" and other cases, where the damage sustained had been only a partial damage, the Court had awarded additional compensation in the nature of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Company (Europe) Ltd and another v Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Plc v Same; Lace International Ltd and Others v Same
...lost under the charter-party. In his judgment, the President, Sir F H Jeune, supported that conclusion by referring to The Columbus (1849) 3 Wm Rob 158. In the absence of further citation of authority, I am prepared to assume that by 1886 the common law of damages for tort would in principl......
-
Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Company (Europe) Ltd and another v Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Plc v Same Lace International Ltd and Others v Same [QBD]
...the profit lost under the charterparty as well (as the plaintiffs contended). The defendants relied upon the decision of Dr Lushington in The Columbus (1849) 3 Wm. Rob. 158 as establishing a rule of law in the Admiralty Court that in cases of total loss, account should not be taken of freig......
-
Liesbosch Dredger (Owners of) v Owners of SS Edison (The Liesbosch)
...delay before the substituted dredger could arrive and start work at Patras. The Respondents in support of their contention relied on the Columbus, 3 W. Rob. 158, in which Dr. Lushington refused in respect of a fishing vessel any compensation save on the basis of the smack's market value wi......
-
Clyde Navigation Trustees v Bowring Steamship Company
...1 The Susquehanna,ELR [1926] A. C. 655, Lord Dunedin at pp. 659 and 661; The Chekiang,ELR [1926] A. C. 637, Lord Dunedin at p. 642. 1 3 W. Rob. 158. 2 Swab. 3 [1899] P. 165. 4 [1906] P. 273. 5 (1889) 14 App. Cas. 519. 6 [1926] A. C. 637. 7 [1926] A. C. 655. 1 [1907] A. C. 241. Court of Sess......