W. I. Radcliffe Steamship Company Ltd v Exporthleb of Moscow
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 June 1939 |
| Date | 21 June 1939 |
| Court | King's Bench Division |
King's Bench Division
Singleton, J.
W. I. Radcliffe Steamship Company Limited v. Exporthleb of Moscow
King Line Limited v. Moxey, Savon, and Co. Limited 62 LI. L. Rep. 252
Charter-party — Construction —‘Discharging at two safe berths in one port’
ASPINALL'S MARITIME LAW CASES. 309 K.B. Div.] W. I, RADCLIFFE S/S COMPANY LTD. v. EXPORTHLEB OF Moscow. [K. B. Div. Wednesday, June 21, 1939. (Before SINGLETON, J.) W. I. Radcliffe Steamship Company Limited v. Exporthleb of Moscow, (a) Charter-party-Construction-" Discharging at two safe berths in one port "-Ship discharging at two separate docks in port of London-Cost of shifting. A charter-party provided that the charterers should have the option of discharging at two safe berths in one port without extra charge. The ship came to London, where she discharged (a) reported by V. R. ARONSON, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 310 ASPINALL'S MARITIME LAW CASES. K.B. Div.] W. I, RADCLIFFE S/S COMPANY LTD. v. EXPORTHLEB OF Moscow. [K. B. Div. part of her cargo at a wharf in Millwall Dock, and the remainder at a wharf in Victoria Dock. Both docks are within the Pool of London. In shifting from one dock to the other expenses owere incurred. Held, that in discharging at two separate wharves within one port the charterers were exercising the option conferred on them, notwithstanding that the wharves were in different docks. The expense of shifting, therefore, fell upon the owners. SPECIAL case stated by an umpire. A charter-party provided as follows : " Charterers have the option of loading and discharging at two safe berths in one port without extra charge, and time for shifting not to count." In the course of the contract voyage the ship came to London, where she discharged part of her cargo at a wharf in Millwall Dock, and the remainder at a wharf in Victoria Dock. Both those docks are within the port of London. In shifting the ship from one wharf to the other, expenses amounting to 140l. were incurred. The owners contended that the charterers were not entitled to discharge at two separate docks in the same port, and that they should bear the extra cost of so doing. The charterers contended, and the umpire held, that in discharging at two berths they were exercising the option conferred on them by the charter-party. A.A Mocatla for- the appellants. J. V. naisby for the respondents. Singleton, J.-The question involved in this case is a very short one. The claimants, W. I. Radcliffe Steamsnip Company Limited and...
To continue reading
Request your trial