The Future Express

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1992
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
9 cases
  • East West Corporation v DKBS 1912 (East West Corporation v Dampskibsselskabet AF 1912 A/S)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 12 Febrero 2003
    ... ... He did not express any view as to whether such a claim might, in any or what circumstances, be subject to exceptions such as those relied upon by the appellants in the ... Likewise, in The Future Express [1992] 2 Ll.R.79, 94–96; [1992] 2 Ll.R. 542 (CA), 547 and The Aliakmon , the courts were concerned with the issue whether the ... ...
  • P & O Nedlloyd BV v Utaniko Ltd; Dampskibsselskabet AF, 1912 Aktieselskab v East West Corporation [QBD (Comm)]
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 12 Febrero 2003
    ... ... Freedom (Owners) v Simmond Hunt & CoELR (1871) LR 3 PC 594 ... Future Express, TheUNK [1992] 2 Ll Rep 79 ; [1993] 2 Ll Rep 542 (CA) ... Gallaher Ltd v British Road Services LtdUNK [1974] 2 Ll Rep 440 ... ...
  • Antariksa Logistics Pte Ltd v Mc Trans Cargo (S) Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 30 Julio 2012
    ...The [2000] 2 SLR (R) 120; [2000] 3 SLR 190 (folld) Francis Hollins v George Fowler (1874-5) LR 7 HL 757 (refd) Future Express, The [1992] 2 Lloyd's Rep 79, QBD (Comm) (folld) Future Express, The [1993] 2 Lloyd's Rep 542, CA (Civ) (refd) Geismar v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Ltd [1978]......
  • Sucre Export SA v Northern Shipping Ltd (The Sormovskiy 3068)
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Admiralty)
    • 25 Abril 1994
    ... ... It made commercial sense to have a simple rule that in the absence of an express term of the contract the master must only deliver the cargo to the holder of the bill of lading who presented it to him. In that way both the ... The precise nature of the exceptions would no doubt require further consideration in the future. The defendants had submitted that if they had delivered the cargo in accordance with the practice, custom and law of the port of discharge they ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • RIGHTS UNDER BILLS OF LADING: TRAWLING THROUGH SINGAPORE WATERS
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2006, December 2006
    • 1 Diciembre 2006
    ...at 476. 146 SS Ardennes (Cargo Owners) v SS Ardennes (Owners) [1951] 1 KB 55 at 60 per Lord Goddard CJ. 147 See The Future Express[1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 79 affirmed at [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 542; see also East West Corpn v DKBS AF 1912 A/S (CA), supra n 95, at 1535. 148 A negotiable bill of lad......
  • HOLDER OF A BILL OF LADING
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1995, December 1995
    • 1 Diciembre 1995
    ...2 Lloyd’s Rep 548; Ishaq v Allied Bank[1981] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 92; Mitchel v Ede(1840) 11 A & E 888; 113 ER 651. 12 The Future Express [1992] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 79 at 99 per Judge Diamond QC. 13 Carver, Carriage by Sea (13th ed.), Vol. 2, para. 1595. 14 The Kronprinsessan Margareta [1921] 1 AC 486. ......
  • Admiralty and Shipping Law
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2019, December 2019
    • 1 Diciembre 2019
    ...573 at [57]. 45 The Yue You 902 [2020] 3 SLR 573 at [60]. 46 The Yue You 902 [2020] 3 SLR 573 at [51]. 47 [2003] 3 SLR(R) 611. 48 [1992] 2 Lloyd's Rep 79. 49 The Yue You 902 [2020] 3 SLR 573 at [44] and [65]. 50 The Yue You 902 [2020] 3 SLR 573 at [74]. 51 The Yue You 902 [2020] 3 SLR 573 a......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT