Onderstaande tekst is niet 100% betrouwbaar


§ 301.

they were the owners, and that as a company registered in this country they were entitled to have the goods released to them as they were in the case of the Poona. I followed the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Continental Tyre and Rubber Company {Great Britain), Ltd., v. Daimler Co., and said that if the judgment of the Court of Appeal was rmsound it must be so pronounced by the House of Lords. It has been pronounced to be unsound by the House of Lords, and following that décision and my own inclination as already expressed in the Poona, I hold that this company for all purposes affecting this case must be regarded as an enemy company, although carrying on business here, and the property must be condemned as enemy property."

(3) Cette doctrine a dans la suite trouvé application aussi dans le cas de sociétés enregistrées en pays neutres. Voir p.ex. la citation suivante de la décision d'appel touchant le Hamborn (1197), appartenant è. une compagnie enregistrée aux Pays-Bas i

„The criteria for deciding enemy character in the case of an artificial person differ from those applicable to a natural person, since, in the nature of things, conduct, which is one of the most important matters, can in the former case only be the conduct of those who act for or in the name of the artificial person."

Ainsi qu'ü apparalt de la décision postérieure relative aux Vesta, Castor and Titan (1338,1376), la jurisprudence anglaise a attribué le caractère ennemi a une société étabbe a Rotterdam:

„These shippers (the Internationale Magnesiet Werken of Rotterdam) own magnesite mines in Greece, and the finding of the President, that they were of enemy character although formaüy a Dutch corporation,

Iis not now contested," et plus loin: „the ownership of the shares and the control of the business invested (the company) with enemy character in.time of war." Comp. aussi les cas du Leda, n°. 1 (18) et n°. 2 (1171), cité aux §§ 126, D 1) et 209, et de la Vulcaan Coal Compy. (867a). Italië.

|§ 301. Le point de vue de la Commission des prises de Rome ne résulte pas de toute évidence des décisions assez rares, oü eüe se prononcé sur les critères de la nationaüté des sociétés. [Voir art. 40 du „Codice per la marina mercantile" de 1877.]

Souvent ses jugements font mention de „ditte di nazionaüta inglese (svedese)", étabbe quelquefois par des ^certificati di nazionaüta" étrangers: Moravia, n<*. 1 (326) et 7 (406); Ambra, n°. 6 (402), ou de „societa inglesi a responsabüitè ümitata" et de „ditte di nazionaüta persiana" : Moravia, n°. 3 (345) 5 Ambra, n°. 5 (401),