Onderstaande tekst is niet 100% betrouwbaar

§ 647.

IIl8

teurs anglais a titre de fret dü par les propriétaires de la cargaison furent allouées. Dans raffaire du Corsican Prince (57) la cour des prises avait a répondre, en premier lieu, aux objections faites par rapport a sa propre compêtence [comp. la cause St. Helena (214; appel: 414), citée au § 646 et, en outre, § 28]; au cours de sa sentence interlocutoire, Sir Samuel Evans définit de la facon suivante la compêtence de la juridiction des prises en matière de fret:

„The Prize Court takes aü the circumstances into consideration, and may award, eis it has done in decided cases, the whole or a moiety of the freight, or a sum pro rata itineris, or it may discard the contract rate altogether, even as a basis for assessment on calculation ; or it may withhold or diminish the sum by reason of misconduct — as, for exemple, by résistance to search, or spoliation or non-disclosure of papers."

L'affaire du Iolo (118) fournit a la cour la première occasion de trancher la question du fret par rapport a un navire anglais ayant transporté une cargaison non sujette a confiscation. Dans ce cas encore, le capteur était hors de cause ; le procés s'agitait seulement èntre les propriétaires russes de la cargaison, qui réclamaient le produit intégral de la vente de 1'orge sans aucune déduction de fret, et les armateurs britanniques, qui réclamaient une certaine somme a titre de fret, bien que 1'état de guerre les eüt empêchés de délivrer le chargement dans le port de destination (Hambourg) et forcés de terminer le transport dans un port anglais.

„Counsel for the Russian Bank contended that they were entitled to be paid out the balance of the proceeds of the sale of the barley in fuü, without any déduction for freight or any other charges. The foundation of his contention was that in law the contract between the shipowners and the bank as owners of cargo, had come to an end, because the goods were not delivered in the port of Hamburg in accordance with the contract .... and that the shipowners were not legaüy entitled to recover the freight or any part thereof....

As the legal aspect of the case .... is of general importance I wül deal also with the law applicable to such cases. I can do this the more briefly because I have already had occasion to deal with the subject in some of its aspects in The Juno (27) and The Corsican Prince (57). The former dealt with the freight claimed by owners of a British ship (in respect of goods which were laden upon her and which were condemned as prize) as against the captors; and the respective positions of British ships and neutral ships in relation to theb rights to freight in such cases were compared. — In the latter I considered the general question of the jurisdiction of the Prize Court to award freight to owners of British ships where the cargo was seized as prize and where it, or its proceeds, had been released, as in the present case.... [suit un extrait du dernier

Sluiten