The County of Durham
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 10 November 1890 |
| Date | 10 November 1890 |
| Court | Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division |
Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division
The Right Hon. Sir James Hannen and Butt, J.
The County of Durham
County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 71), ss. 3 and 21
County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Amendment Act 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 51), ss. 1 and 2.
Charter-party County Court Venue
606 MARITIME LAW CASES. Adm.] The County or Durham. [Adm. Monday, Nov. 10,1890. (Before the Bight Hon. Sir James Hannen and Butt, J.) The County of Durham, (a) Charter-party - County Court - Venue - County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 71), ss 3 and 21 - County Courte Adim-ralty Jurisidiction Amendment Act 1860 (82 & 33 Voct. a 51), ss. 1 and 2. Shipowners may institute an action in personam against charterers for breach of charter-party, under mot. 2 of the County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Amendment Act 1869, in the County Court having Admiralty Jurisdiction within the jurisdiction of which their vessel is at the com-mencement of such proceedings. This was an appeal by the defendants in an action for breach of charter-party from the decision of the judge of the Newcastle Connty Court. The action was instituted in personam on the Admiralty side of the Newcastle County Court, by the owners of the steamship County of Durham against her charterers to recover compensation for damage sustained by the County of Durham taking the ground at the defendants' wharf at Poole. The plaintiffs, who were she assignees of the charter-party in question, resided in the district of the Newcastle County Court. The defendants resided at Poole. At the time of the commencement of the action, the County of Durham was within the jurisdiction of the Newcastle County Court. The defendants moved the County Court judge to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction. The learned judge refused to do so. and his judgment, so far as it is material, is as follows : - " So, far as the plea of want of jurisdiction may be said to depend upon the general Admiralty Jurisdiction of Connty Courts over a charter-party" of this description, no difficulty exists. The difference which prevailed a few years ago between the High Court of Admiralty and the Courts of Common Pleas and Exchequer on the one hand, and the judges of the Privy Council on the other, as to whether County Courts in Admiralty have not, under recent legislation, a more extensive jurisdiction in certain matters than the High Court has been. finally set at rest by the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of The Aline, (42 L. T. Rep. N. S. 517; 4 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 257; 5 Ex. Div. 227). This case, and that of The Cargo ta?? Argoa (28 L. T. Rep. N. S. 745; L. Bop. 5 P. C. 134; 2 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 6; are direct authorities far the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The City of Agra
...Divorce, and Admiralty Division Barnes, J. The City of Agra The County of DurhamDID=ASPMELR 64 L. T. Rep. 146 6 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 606 (1891) P. 1 Pugsley v. RopkinsDID=ASPMELR 67 L. T. Rep. 369 7 Asp. Mar. Law Cas. 215 (1892) 2 Q. B. 184 The HeroDID=ASPMELR 65 L. T. Rep. 499 7 Asp. Mar. La......