Issue: Whether or not the White Pearls has been use the obligation not to deviate from the agreed route to the Jag Separooh?
Law:The ship owner was under the justifiable deviation or unjustifiable deviation during on the route. It other words, the deviation was not being allowed to straying from the route of destination that been implied in the contract of term. It also occurs when a carrier of goods departs from agreed, usual or direct route. Then, route can be known as a customary or regular line of passage or travel.
According to the case of Reardon Smith Line, Ltd. v. Black Sea & Baltic General Insurance Company, Ltd. (1939) 64 Ll.L.Rep. 229, it tell about the duty of the ship when there voyage from the one point to another point that been use an usual route. When there is no evidence, the route will be the direct geographical route. The case is known by there has chartered a ship to go Sparrow Point which located in United States from the Black Sea port. There will depart to bunker in Constanza by using the direct geographical route where they can get the cheap supplies of oil fuel. There has an evidence that ship been always route to Constanza and 25 percent of oil burning vessels that pass by the Bosphorus. Court was held there been no deviation from the normal route.
According to the justifiable deviation it has two major point which is the deviation to save human life and to avoid imminent peril or to avoid the danger to the ship or the cargo. If there has an unjustifiable deviation during voyages on the route by agreed, direct and customary, the contract of carriage goods can be considered as a breach.
The deviation to save human life which means the most purposes for the deviation is to make a communication to the others ship if there has anything problem it will be considered such as there has involved the danger in their life when on the route. But if they use the deviation for the purpose such as save the property it will be not allowed under of this provision. The second point is to avoid imminent peril or to avoid the danger to the ship or cargo is to prosecution of the voyage purpose or to have a safety during the adventure for the ship that bring the cargo.
According to the case of Scaramanga v. Stamp (1880) 5 C.P.D. 295, it been tell about the carrier had been deviated to save the life initially when the captain was agreed on the monetary award by giving 1000 if they help them to tow the boat as the salvage that altered the nature of the deviation in such of manner. Court was held that she was not right to attempt the save of the ships but if she had to save the crew the departure would been justified. The deviation will not be justified.
Application: In the case of White Pearl, there has an agreement between both parties which is Barbosa a luxury vessel. In the common law, there has a principal which they can helps others ship when it has a problem or danger during on the sea entitled for the reward proportionate value of the saved property. There has been allow for the ship or ship towards exception to make the deviation known as justifiable deviation. But in this case, Barbosa has been agreed help from the White Pearl to deviate the ship because of the failure engine. According to this, the deviation would not be justified because the main purpose of the White Pearls wants to claim the salvage remuneration not for the help to the Barbosa. The voyage to Lettermore, the cargo of the Jag Separooh who charterer has loss during the voyage. It will be used the avoid imminent peril or to avoid danger to the ship or cargo. This been related to the case of Scaramanga v. Stamp (1880) 5 C.P.D. 295.
Conclusion: My advice the White Pearl is liable for the loss of cargo Jag Separooh according to unjustifiable deviation.
Issue: Whether or not Will Turner hold the liability for providing the ship that is not cargoworthiness?
Law: The vessel is not a cargoworthiness that means it is a suitability for the vessel to carry the cargo for safely to the particular voyage. Others than that in the perspective, to determine the cargowitheness it very important to measure the load distribution, cargo securing, type of cargo, machinery and lastly a good seamanship. Furthermore, it is an obligation for the carrier to provide the vessel that in term of equipment and document that need provide the cargoworthinesss of the vessel that being able for the duty.
In the principle, if the charterer or shipper that discover the ship unseaworthy before the voyage and the defect cannot remedy with the reasonable time, it can make a repudiate to the contract.
In the vessel is not cargoworthines, according to the previous case it can be implied the point which is where the pumps were inadequate to drain surplus water from the cargo. According to the case of Stanton v. Richardson (1875) L.R. 9 C.P. 390, a ship was chartered by the cargo that contains of wet sugar. When the cargo of wet sugar has been loaded into the ship, that been realize the pumps were not in the sufficient capacity to remove the drainage from the sugar and the cargo need to be discharged. The pumping machinery was not could for the obtained considerable time and the charterer has been refused to reload the cargo.
The court was held the ship was unseaworthy for the cargo agreed and she could not be fit in a reasonable time. The vessel must have to conform the design and structure and be fitted with appropriate equipment to meet the general risks of maritime adventure as stipulated in the contract. The owner's failure to provide a proper equipment rendered the ship unnavigable. The charterer be refusing for the reload of cargo.
Application:In the past scenario, Will Turner ship having a problem with the pumped machinery same goes on of the case Stanton v. Richardson (1875) L.R. 9 C.P. 390that can damage the good that been chartered by Miss Swan from Port of Klang to the Port of Singapore. Before the voyage, Miss Swan giving full liability to the shipowner being handling to the cargo that been carry from the starting point to the final destination. In this case, the court held she can may repudiate the contract that been agreed before.
In the same vein, Will Turner ship is can be categorized under the vessel is not the cargoworthiness liability.
Conclusion: My advice to Miss Swan, she can repudiate the contract if the shipper or charterer discover the ship unseaworthy before the voyage begin with the defect of reasonable time.
Our happy customers
They are fast in responding to homework questions. they have the best technical writers. Thanks for helping me with my programming doubts.
I contact to disklib for homework, they help me out, despite there was some technical issue they gone through extra mile for me and provide me good quality work in first priority. 100% recommended.
Desklib's study resources are best & unique. Their study database is easy to access and easy to use.
100 % recommended.