Savannah Sugar Refining Corporation v. SS Hudson Deep
Decision Date | 05 January 1968 |
Docket Number | No. 66 A.D. 479.,66 A.D. 479. |
Citation | 288 F. Supp. 181 |
Parties | SAVANNAH SUGAR REFINING CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. SS HUDSON DEEP, her engines, etc. and Hudson Steamship Co. Ltd., Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Kelly, Donovan, Robinson & Maloof, New York City, for plaintiff.
Hill, Betts, Yamaoka, Freehill & Longcope, New York City, for defendant.
Defendant (Respondent), ship owner, moves in this cargo damage action for an order under Title 9 U.S.C. Section 3, staying all proceedings herein and directing arbitration.
Plaintiff (Libellant) filed this action on May 12, 1966 to recover alleged cargo damages to a bulk shipment of sugar carried from Dunkirk to Savannah aboard the SS HUDSON DEEP in April-May, 1965. Plaintiff claims it was the shipper, consignee or owner of the shipment.
Defendant HUDSON STEAMSHIP CO., LTD., admits it was the owner of the SS HUDSON DEEP and that the cargo was shipped aboard in apparent good order and condition "to be transported in accordance with the terms and conditions of a bulk sugar charter agreement with Sucres et Denrees, S.A. Paris, dated April 1, 1965." As an affirmative defense, defendant ship owner pleads that plaintiff's claim here asserted is subject to the arbitration provision of the charter party agreement which provides:
Defendant prays in this defense "that all further proceedings in this litigation be stayed until arbitration has been held."
It is undisputed that the charter party was entered into as of April 1, 1965 at London, England, between defendant ship owner and Sucres et Denrees, S.A. Paris, and that the plaintiff was not a signatory to it. The charter party covered the voyage in suit and was on the customary "Bulk Sugar Charter — U.S.A. (April 1962)" printed form. The printed bill of lading issued for the cargo has the following additional typewritten addendum: "Subject to all the terms, provisions and conditions of Bulk Sugar Charter Party USA (April, 1962) dated at London on 1st April, 1965."
Plaintiff contends that British law applies to the construction of both the Bill of Lading and the Charter Party (citing Fox, et al. v. The Guiseppe Mazzini, et al., D.C., 110 F.Supp. 212). Defendant in its brief states that "as a matter of substantive law we would not argue too strongly against that stand." We hold that British law is to be applied.
The question presented is whether under British law the arbitration clause of the charter party (above quoted), which is incorporated by...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States ex rel. Carioscia v. Meisner
... ... g., Sniadach v. Family Finance Corporation, 395 U.S. 337, 89 S.Ct. 1820, 23 L.Ed.2d 349 ... ...
-
Michael v. SS THANASIS, Civ. No. 47530.
...case law and the changing attitude after Thomas & Co. accounts for the opinion of the court in Savannah Sugar Refining Corporation v. SS Hudson Deep, 288 F. Supp. 181 (S.D.N.Y.1968), a case heavily relied on by plaintiffs. Savannah concerned the incorporation into a bill of lading of a char......
- Davis v. United States, Civ. A. No. 16916-3.