Son Shipping Co. v. De Fosse & Tanghe

Decision Date12 November 1952
Docket NumberNo. 26,Docket 22394.,26
Citation199 F.2d 687
PartiesSON SHIPPING CO., Inc. v. DE FOSSE & TANGHE et al.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Hill, Rivkins & Middleton, New York City, for appellants; Gregory S. Rivkins and John J. Killea, New York City, of counsel.

Dow & Symmers, New York City, for appellee; John R. Sheneman and William A. Wilson, New York City, of counsel.

Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CHASE and CLARK, Circuit Judges.

CHASE, Circuit Judge.

The principal problem presented by this appeal is whether an arbitration clause in a charter party was so incorporated in bills of lading that the provisions for arbitration in the charter party are enforceable.

De Fosse & Tanghe chartered the tanker Norita, on June 29, 1948, to transport a full cargo of fuel oil from Antwerp to Tel Aviv and Haifa, Palestine. It is probable that De Fosse & Tanghe were acting as agents for Solel Boneh, Ltd., but that is not entirely clear and is immaterial on this appeal.

On July 1, 1948, the master of the Norita signed and delivered to Raffinerie Belge De Petroles S. A., as the shipper, two memorandum order bills of lading accepting the receipt aboard the vessel of 9,089,038 kilos of oil. This oil had been purchased from the above named shipper by Solel Boneh, Ltd., and the shipper later delivered to that buyer the usual commercial documents including the order bills of lading, indorsed in blank. While the vessel was proceeding from Antwerp to Palestine, Solel Boneh, Ltd., sold the full cargo of oil to The Palestine Electric Corporation and delivered the documents to it.

The vessel duly arrived at Tel Aviv, where it discharged one-half of its cargo, and at Haifa where the remainder was discharged on July 16, 1948. On July 18, 1948, the ultimate consignee made claim against the vessel for short delivery to the extent of a little over 242 metric tons of oil. Nothing further seems to have been done until, on April 14, 1950, the charterer demanded arbitration of the claim in accordance with the charter provisions. The shipowner denied liability, declined to arbitrate and brought this proceeding to secure a permanent injunction to prevent the arbitration of the dispute. The injunction was granted and this appeal followed.

The charter party provided that, "Any and all differences and disputes of whatsoever nature arising out of this charter shall be put to arbitration in the city of New York * * *" and there is no question but that the provisions of this charter were duly invoked by the appellants, if their demand for arbitration was timely. The order bills of lading provided in part as follows:

"This shipment is carried under and pursuant to the terms of the charter dated Antwerp, June 29th, 1948 between Son Shipping Company and De Fosse & Tanghe, charterer, and all the terms whatsoever of the said charter except the rate and payment of freight specified therein apply to and govern the rights of the parties concerned in this shipment."

The injunction was granted because the court was of the opinion (1) that the language above quoted was insufficient as a matter of law to make the terms of the charter party in respect to arbitration a part of the bills of lading; and (2) that this dispute arose out of the non-fulfillment of the terms of the bills of lading as to which there were no applicable provisions for arbitration. We do not agree.

These order bills of lading specifically referred to the charter party and, in language so plain that its meaning is unmistakable, incorporated in the bills all the terms "whatsoever" of the charter party "except the rate and payment of freight specified therein." The very breadth of the language of inclusion is emphasized by the specific exception and leaves no fair...

To continue reading

Request your trial
76 cases
  • Board of Ed. of Berkeley County v. W. Harley Miller, Inc.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 5 Julio 1977
    ...principles of contract law and therefore subject to invalidation only insofar as general contract law provides. Son Shipping Co. v. DeFosse & Tanghe, 199 F.2d 687 (2d Cir., 1952); Lowry & Co. v. S. S. Le Moyne D'Iberville, 253 F.Supp. 396 (S.D.N.Y., 1966), appeal dismissed, 372 F.2d 123 (2d......
  • Energy Transport, Ltd. v. M.V. San Sebastian
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 10 Diciembre 2004
    ...Imp. Exp. Steel Corp. v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co., 351 F.2d 503, 506 (2d Cir.1963) (citing Son Shipping Co. v. De Fosse & Tanghe, 199 F.2d 687, 688 (2d Cir.1952)); see also Midland Tar Distillers, Inc. v. M/T Lotos, 362 F.Supp. 1311, 1313 (S.D.N.Y.1973) ("The bill of lading will be......
  • Glencore Ltd. v. Degussa Engineered Carbons L.P., 11 Civ. 7153(PAE).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 24 Enero 2012
    ...maritime contracts may validly incorporate by reference terms from other documents or agreements.”) (citing Son Shipping Co. v. De Fosse & Tanghe, 199 F.2d 687, 688 (2d Cir.1952)); Ronan Assocs. v. Local 94–94A–94B, Int'l Union of Operating Eng'rs, 24 F.3d 447, 449 (2d Cir.1994) (finding em......
  • PROGRESSIVE CAS. v. CA REASEGURADORA NACIONAL
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 30 Septiembre 1992
    ...D'Iberville, 253 F.Supp. 396, 398 (S.D.N.Y.1966), appeal dismissed, 372 F.2d 123 (2d Cir.1967). See also Son Shipping Co. v. De Fosse & Tanghe, 199 F.2d 687, 688 (2d Cir.1952). Id. at In Lowry, cited and quoted by the Second Circuit in Nereus, Judge Weinfeld dealt with a bill of lading whic......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • When do statutes of limitations apply in arbitration?
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 81 No. 9, October 2007
    • 1 Octubre 2007
    ...is inapplicable to this arbitration proceeding." 7 The results are similar in other courts. In Son Shipping Co. v. DeFosse & Tanghe, 199 F.2d 687, 688 (2d Cir. 1952), the Second Circuit, in the context of The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act held, "[i]t is true that the demand was not made ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT