The assessment of months, or within any shorter period which may be fixed by the Court. The money will be paid out at the end of this period, a reference, if necessary, having been previously held when there are several claimants. If the defendant in the limitation suit desires it the Court will require the plaintiff's solicitor to give an undertaking that the costs of the limitation action shall be duly paid.1 It should be noted that the holder of a bottomry bond on freight has a claim for the amount of his bond against a sum paid out of Court to the owners of the innocent vessel in respect of loss of freight.2 The principle which regulates the assessment of damages damages to a ship is that the plaintiff shall be placed in the same position as if the ship had not been lost or damaged, subject to the provisions as to limited liability which have already been mentioned. If the ship is totally lost, the owner should receive her value and that of the freight which she would certainly have earned but for her destruction. If the vessel is partially injured, the damages recoverable consist of the cost of necessary repairs, even though she may be more valuable after they have been executed than before the collision, and a sum by way of consequential damages, if any have been incurred, less the sums which would have been spent in earning that which is lost, in respect of losses proximately or necessarily 1 The Sisters, L. R. 1 P. D. 281; 35 L. T. N. S. 36; The Expert, 36 L. T. N. S. 258. 2 The Empusa, L. R. 5 P. D. 6; 48 L. J. Ad. D. 36. The South Sea, Swa. 141. When a vessel was sunk by a collision, and was afterwards raised and repaired, and the cost exceeded her original value, it was held that the measure of damages was this prior value, though as this decision turned largely ou whether or not the owners should have, if properly advised, undertaken to repair her, it can hardly be looked on as establishing a general rule: The Empress Eugenie, Lush. 138; and see next page. The Clyde, sup. ; The Pactolus, Swa. 173; 28 L. T. N. S. 220. 6 The Black Prince, Lush. 568; 5 L. T. N. S. 39 (by way of demurrage); The Legatus, Swa. 168. Salvage to damaged ship, but not if rendered necessary by the misconduct or negligence of her crew : caused by the injury which is the ground of the action,1 but exclusive of those which, though they result from the damage, are not necessary consequences of it.2 Thus when the damaged ship was one of a line of steamers, each of which took turns for sailing, and in the ordinary course of business was idle for a certain time, and the vessel in question lost her turn and took the following one, it was held that she was entitled to demurrage for the number of days she remained in port after her usual day of sailing, but not for the whole time during which she was in port.3 The usual demurrage rate is sixpence per ton per day for steamers and fourpence for sailing ships. For the same reasons if a charter-party is abandoned because owing to the collision there is no reasonable probability that it can be fulfilled, this is a clear element of damage. Where the limited liability exceptions do not apply, interest where the vessel is lost without cargo runs from date of loss to date of payment; where she is lost with cargo, on the value of ship and freight from the date of the probable end of the voyage. Where the limited liability provisions are applicable, interest runs in all cases from the date of the loss." 5 Generally, when a ship is totally lost, her market value at the time of her loss is a fair criterion of her actual value, but it may also be estimated from various other facts, as her original value, or the opinion of competent witnesses on The Linda, Swa. 206; The Betsy Caines, 2 Hagg. 28. Sums agreed to be paid as salvage: The Star of India, 1 L. R. Ad. D. 446; 45 L. J. Ad. 102 (loss of freight); The Gazelle, 21 W. Rob. 279. The Thuringia, 41 L. J. Ad. 44; 26 L. T. N. S. 446. Eg., if greater courage would have prevented them: The Thuringia; The Flying Fish, 3 Moo. P. C. N. S. 87; 34 L. J. Ad. 113; The Empress Eugenie, Lush. 138. 3 The Black Prince, Lush. 468; 5 L. T. N. S. 39. The City of Buenos Ayres, 25 L. T. N. S. 672; 1 M. L. C (N. S.) 169. 3 The Consett, L. R. 5 P. D. 229. The Canada, Lush. 586. 7 The Northumbria, 3 L. R. Ad. 6; 39 L. J. Ad. 3; The City of Buenos Ayres, 25 L. T. N. S. 672; 1 Asp. M. C. (N. S.) 169. Damages after in juries to goods. In breach of contract or duty. board as to her condition, or of persons conversant with shipping who can form an independent judgment.1 When goods are lost or injured, the damages to be awarded are usually the value of the lost goods, or the amount by which their value has been reduced. That value is, generally speaking, the market value of the goods at the time and place where they should have been delivered, or in case of partial damage only, at the port of discharge. If from any cause there is no market for the goods, their real value, so far as is possible, must be ascertained as a fact, by considering the circumstances which would have influenced the market if one had existed, that is to say, the price of similar goods at the place of manufacture or production, less the cost of carriage, and allowing a reasonable sum for importer's profit.2 In case of a breach of contract or of duty the measure of damages is the amount of any loss, so far as it is a natural and necessary consequence of such breach, which is at once actual and reasonably possible, or such as is the natural consequence of a non-fulfilment of an object within the contemplation of the parties to the bill of lading.3 In most cases the damages, whether arising from collision or breach of a charter-party, are referred to the Registrar and Merchants for assessment; but when the question of damage can be decided on the hearing of the action more fitly than by the Registrar and Merchants, the Court will give a decision on the point. In questions arising out of 1 The Clyde, Swa. 23; The Ironmaster, Swa. 443; The African Steamship Co. v. Swanzy, 2 Kay & J. 660; 25 L. J. Ch. 870. 2 See Mayne on Damages, 2nd ed. 220; Rice v. Baxendale, 7 H. & N. 96; 30 L. J. Ex. 371; O'Hanlan v. Great Western Ry. Co., 6 B. & S. 484; 34 L. J. Q. B. 154; The St. Cloud, Br. & L. 4 (18); Brandt v. Bewley, 2 B. & Ad. 932 (939).“ 3 The Parana, 2 L. R. Ad. 118; 36 L. T. N. S. 388; Simpson v. London and N. W. Ry. Co., 1 L. R. Q. B. D. 274; 45 L. J. Q. B. D. 182; Sedgwick on Damages, 6th ed., p. 431. • The Maid of Kent, 50 L. J. Ad. D. 71. damage to cargo, the Registrar should follow common law principles in assessing the amount due.1 lien. A maritime lien for damage arises as soon as the injury Maritime is done; it attaches henceforth to the ship,2 and to its appurtenances, and to the whole of the freight. But the cargo may be arrested for freight due in respect of its carriage, which was in process of being earned, though it was not on board at the time when the damage was done.5 But no maritime lien exists against a ship in cases arising out of the negligence, misconduct, or breach of duty of the owner, master, or crew of a ship, so that valid charges have a priority over such claims, and the vessel is only a security from the time of its arrest." In any cause of action already mentioned, proceedings Limitation should not be taken in the Admiralty Division if the to actions. amount claimed does not exceed 300l. Recent decisions, as pointed out previously (p. 15), have, however, abrogated the provisions of the County Court Acts as to costs, and the matter is one for the discretion of the Court. 1 The St. Cloud, Br. & L. 4. The Bold Buccleugh, 7 Moo. P. C. 267 (281); The Lymington, 32 L. T. N. S. 69; 23 W. R. 421. The claim is good against the full value of the ship, if repaired subsequently to the date of damage: The Aline, 1 W. Rob. 111 (120). 3 The Alexander, 1 Dods. 278 (282); The Dundee, 1 Hagg. 104. • The Rowcliff, 2 L. R. Ad. 363; 38 L. J. Ad. 56. 5 The Leo, Lush. 444; 31 L. J. Ad. 78; The Orpheus, 3 L. R. Ad. 308; 40 L. J. Ad. 24. And see ante as to lien generally, p. 6. The Pieve Superiore, 5 L. R. P. C. 412; 43 L. J. Ad. 20. 7 31 & 32 Vict. c. 71, ss. 3, 4, 9; 32 & 33 Vict. c. 57, ss. 2, 4. CHAPTER IV. WAGES. THE law relating to the wages of scamen has in this country since the passing of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, become almost wholly statutory, and the jurisdiction of the Admiralty Division itself may be said now to be based on the Admiralty Court Act of 1861, which finally gave to this maritime tribunal a power which had been long and often denied to it by the Courts of Common Law. By that statute the Court has "jurisdiction over any claim by a seaman of any ship for wages earned by him on board the ship, whether the same be due under a special contract or otherwise, and also over any claim by the master of any ship for wages earned by him on board the ship, and for disbursements made by him on account of the ship."1 A seaman to whom wages are due has a right of action against the owner or the master (if he be not himself the master) at law, or he may bring his action in the Admiralty Division, either in personam against the owner or in rem against the ship,2 and if he fails to obtain relief, or all the relief to which he is entitled, by one process, the other remains open to him,3 so that if he consents to forego his claim against the owner personally, the ship is not 124 Vict. c. 10, s. 10. Ship in the above section is, by s. 2, defined as "any description of vessel used in navigation not propelled by oars. 2 A. C. Act, 1861, s. 35. The Bengal, Swa. 468; and see further as to actions in rem and in personam, p. 43. |