Macnamara v Owners of s.s. "Hatteras"

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 23 April 1931
• Date: 23 April 1931
• Court: Supreme Court (Irish Free State)

Macnamara v. Owners of The s.s. "Hatteras"

MICHAEL MACNAMARA & SON

Plaintiffs

and

THE OWNERS OF THE STEAMSHIP "HATTERAS,"Defendants (1)

Supreme Court.

Shipping - Bill of Lading - Construction - Shipment subject to the provisions of the Harter Act - American contract - Foreign law - Necessity for proof.

Each of two bills of lading (which were similar) for certain goods to be carried from the United States of America to the Irish Free State in a ship, the property of the United States Shipping Board, stated that the shipments were subject to all the terms and provisions of, and all the exemptions from liability contained in, the Harter Act, an Act of Congress of the United States of America.

The construction of these two bills of lading came before Meredith J. in the form of a Special Case for his opinion on two questions of law arising thereon, and these two questions were decided by him (reportedante, p. 73). The shipowners having appealed from his decision:

Held by the Supreme Court that the bills of lading were American contracts, and as such should be construed by American law, and that that law must be proved or admitted before the Court would be competent to decide the questions of law submitted in the Special Case. Therefore the order of Meredith J. must be discharged, and the Special Case be remitted to the High Court to be determined accordingly.

Order of Meredith J., reported ante, p. 73, discharged.

Appeal by the defendants from part of the order of Meredith J., dated the 26th day of November, 1930. His decision is reported ante, p. 73. The portion of the order appealed from was the answer to the first question of law submitted for determination in the Special Case, viz.: that "This Court is of opinion, on the true construction of the bills of lading in the said Special Case mentioned, and in the absence of negligence as alleged on the part of the defendants, their servants, or agents, the defendants are liable for the damage caused to the plaintiffs' tobacco by vermin as in the said Special Case mentioned." The defendants applied for an order that the aforesaid words in the order might he set aside and rescinded, and that in lieu thereof it might be declared that the said question be answered in the negative.

The facts are set out in the report of the case in the Court below, ante, p. 73.

The Court discharged the order of Meredith J. The following is the material portion of their order:—

"The Court being of opinion, and...