Skip to main content
· 10/15/1918

Piaggio v. Somerville

Citations

  • 119 Miss. 6
  • 80 So. 342

Syllabus

<p>1. Shipping. Charters. Performance. Submarine danger.</p> <p>The owners of vessels are bound to transport cargoes as provided in their charter party, notwithstanding the risk to their vessels of being sunk by a submarine, or pay damages for their failure so to do, for the rule is that when a party, by his own contract, creates a duty or charge upon himself he is bound to difecharge it, although so to do should subsequently become unexpectedly burdensome or even impossible.</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>The answer to the objection of hardship in all such cases being that it might have been guarded against by a proper stipulation.</p> <p>3. Gontiíacts. Nonperformance. Excuse. Illegality.</p> <p>There are three classes of cases in which a party is excused from the performance of a contract: First — A subsequent change in the law, whereby performance becomes unlawful; Second— The destruction, from no default of either party, of the specific thing, the continued existence of which is essential to the performance of the contract; Third — The death or incapacitating illness of the promissor in a contract which has for its object the rendering by him of personal services.</p> <p>4. Shipping. Charters. Assignment. Waiver of clearance.</p> <p>The assignor of a charter party is entitled to recover from the assignee the consideration of the assignment which was payable on clearance of the vessel, where the assignee made full settlement with the owners of the vessel, though such owners refused to permit the vessel to sail, since in such case, clearance was waived by such settlement.</p> <p>5. Shipping. Charter. Assignment. Consideration.</p> <p>Where the consideration for an assignment of a charter party was “payable on clearance,” such clearance was not a condition precedent to the assignors’ right to recover the consideration, but was merely the time fixed for payment of a present liability, and where there was no clearance, the assignor was entitled to payment within a reasonable

Judges: Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.