CONFLICT OF LAWS--CONTRACTS--EXCUSES FOR NON-PERFORMANCE

Authors

Abstract

Libellant sought to recover on a contract made in Duluth for the shipment of grain by defendant from Duluth to Montreal. The grain was reshipped by defendant at Port Colbourne, Ontario, and was sunk in the St. Lawrence River. Canadian Water Carrier of Goods Act, sec. 6 (9-10 Edw. VII, c. 81), provides that if the owner of any ship carrying merchandise from any port in Canada exercises due diligence to make the ship in all respects seaworthy and properly manned, neither the ship, owner, agent, nor charterer shall be liable for faults in navigation. The court held defendant was a through carrier, that the loss was due to negligent management of the ship, but that the defendant was excused by virtue of the Canadian act if the ship was in fact seaworthy. The decree dismissing the libel was reversed and the cause remanded for the introduction of evidence on the sole issue of whether the arrangement and condition of the pumps and valves were such as to make the ship seaworthy. Louis-Dreyfus v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd., 43 F.(2d) 824-

Recommended Citation

CONFLICT OF LAWS--CONTRACTS--EXCUSES FOR NON-PERFORMANCE, 29 Mich. L. Rev. 773 (1931).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol29/iss6/17