Texas Co. v. Hogarth Shipping Co.

Citations

• 256 U.S. 619
• 41 S. Ct. 612
• 65 L. Ed. 1123
• 1921 U.S. LEXIS 1545

Syllabus

<p>1. A voyage charterparty for a vessel to be named, with no provision for a substitution, under which a vessel has been selected, is to be treated thenceforth as a contract for that particular vessel. P. 627.</p> <p>2. Error in permitting the British Ambassador to intervene, as amicus curim, and to present a certificate avowing the requisition of the ship here in question as an act of his government, held not prejudicial. P. 629.</p> <p>3. A British ship, owned by a British corporation, was subject to requisition by the British Government for war purposes while in British waters preparing for service under a voyage chartérparty</p> <p>■ - máde in this country with an American corporation. Pp. 628, 631. ' 4. A telegraphic requisition treated as binding in the practice of the . British Government, and followed by use of the ship as a government transport and compensation of the owner therefor, held valid. P. 628.</p> <p>5. Where a ship is rendered unavailable for the performance of a charterparty by a valid requisition of government, not invited by the owner or provided for in the contract, for a service likely to extend (which in this case did extend) beyond the time for the projected charter voyage, the owner is excused from performance. P. 629.</p> <p>6. The contract ^ust be deemed to have been entered into, subject to an implied condition that,, in such an event, it should be at an end and the parties absolved from further liability under it. P. 631.</p> <p>267 Fed. Rep. 1023, affirmed; ></p>