( Ante, vol. xxix. p. 856, and 19 R. 987.)
Subject_Ship — Charter-Party — Delay in Taking Delivery — Rescission.
By charter-party dated 3rd July 1891 the owner of a steamer then being fitted out in the Clyde for the summer traffic, agreed to let her to a charterer till 30th September. The charter-party provided that the charterer should “pay for the use and hire of the said vessel at the rate of £425 per month, commencing the day of delivery …. whereof notice shall be given to the charterer … payment of the hire to be made in cash monthly, in advance, … first month's hire to be paid before the steamer leaves the Clyde.
Charterer agrees to give a banker's guarantee for the due payment of the hire money.”
As soon as the charter-party was signed the owner began, through his broker, to press the charterer for the bank guarantee. The charterer replied that he was not bound to give the guarantee until the vessel was ready to be handed over. The broker assented to this, but continued from 6th to 10th July to press the charterer daily to give the guarantee. The charterer made no answer to any of these communications until the 10th, when he replied that he was prepared to give the guarantee on delivery of the vessel. On 13th July the broker telegraphed that the vessel would be delivered in Glasgow on the 15th. The charterer replied that he would leave Hastings for Glasgow on the night of the 15th to take delivery, but without notifying the owner he postponed his departure for a day, and did not reach Glasgow until the morning of the 17th, when he found that the owner had chartered the vessel to someone else.
Held ( aff. the judgment of the First Division) (1) that the charterer had not committed a breach of contract by failing to take delivery on the day fixed; (2) that the charterer's conduct had not been such as to justify the owner in believing that he did not intend to fulfil his contract; and therefore found the charterer entitled to damages.
This case is reported ante, vol. xxix. p. 856, and 19 R. 987.
At delivering judgment—
The appeal was accordingly dismissed, with costs.
Counsel for the Appellant— Bigham, Q.C.— Orr. Agents— Deacon, Gibson, & Medcalf, for Simpson & Marwick, W.S.
Counsel for the Respondent— Salvesen— Crole. Agents— Learoyd, James, & Mellor, for W. B. Rainnie, S.S.C.