The Gul Djemal Hussein Lutfi Bey v. Campbell Stuart, No. 83

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtMcREYNOLDS
Citation44 S.Ct. 244,264 U.S. 90,1924 A. M. C. 434,68 L.Ed. 574
Decision Date18 February 1924
Docket NumberNo. 83
PartiesTHE GUL DJEMAL. HUSSEIN LUTFI BEY v. CAMPBELL & STUART, inc

264 U.S. 90
44 S.Ct. 244
68 L.Ed. 574
THE GUL DJEMAL. HUSSEIN LUTFI BEY

v.

CAMPBELL & STUART, inc.

No. 83.
Argued Jan. 4, 1924.
Decided Feb. 18, 1924.

Messrs. Wm. A. Purrington and John M. Woolsey, both of New York City, for appellant.

Mr. Oscar R. Houston, of New York City, for appellee.

Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Seeking to recover for supplies and services furnished at New York during November, 1920, in order to fit her

Page 91

for an intended voyage across the Atlantic, appellee libeled the steamship Gul Djemal and caused her arrest under the ordinary admiralty practice. Her master, appearing for the sole purpose of objecting to the court's jurisdiction, claimed immunity for the vessel because owned and possessed by the Turkish government, and asked that she be released. No one except the master has advanced this claim.

The parties stipulated1: The Turkish government and the United States are at peace with each other, but diplomatic relations have been severed. The Gul Djemal is the absolute property of the Turkish government and under the administration of the transport section of the Ministry of Marine. That government employed and

Page 92

paid the master, officers and crew—the master being a reserve naval officer—and was in possession of the ship when arrested. She —

'was engaged in commercial trade, under charter for one round voyage to George Dedeoglou, who engaged to carry passengers and goods for hire, and in such trade the Gul Djemal was not functioning in a naval or military capacity, nor was there anything of a naval or military character connected with the voyage of the Gul Djemal from Constantinople to New York and return.' return.'

The court below denied the alleged immunity and passed a decree for the libelant. Upon this direct appeal only the question of jurisdiction is presented. The relevant certificate follows:

'The sole question raised by the answer of the claimant herein, and the sole issue before this court, was the jurisdiction

Page 93

of the court over the steamship Gul Djemal, a vessel owned, manned, operated by, and in the possession of the sovereign government of Turkey, at peace with the government of the United States of America. The allegations of the libelant that it had furnished supplies to the vessel, were admitted by the claimant, whose answer set up that the vessel was immune, as a sovereign owned vessel, from the process of this court, and that the vessel was not within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of this court. I have granted a decree for the amount prayed for by the libelant, and have denied immunity to the vessel, because at the time the cause of action and

Page 94

liability on which the libel is founded were created, and at the time the vessel was seized under process of this court, she was, although owned, manned by, and in the possession of the sovereign government of Turkey, engaged in commercial trade, under charter for hire to a private trader, and furthermore, because diplomatic relations between the United States and Turkey were then severed, and no appropriate suggestion was filed from the State Department of the United States.'

Appellee maintains that whatever may be the proper rule in our courts concerning the ultimate immunity of vessels owned by foreign governments and employed in ordinary trade and commerce, such immunity will not be granted upon the mere claim of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc v. Republic of Cuba, No. 73-1288
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • December 10, 1974
    ...of state or indicate that the interventors had governmental, as opposed to merely commercial, authority for the refusal. The "Gul Djemal", 264 U.S. 90, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574. Pp. 691-694. (c) The interventors' counsel's statement during trial that the Cuban Government and the intervent......
  • Knox v. Palestine Liberation Organization, No. 03 Civ. 4466.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • March 1, 2004
    ...sovereign and determine rights in property ... upon the basis of these decrees."); The Gul Djemal, 296 F. 563, 564 (S.D.N.Y.1920), aff'd, 264 U.S. 90, 95, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574 (1924); Restatement (Third) § 204; see generally Stanley Lubman, The Unrecognized Government in American Cour......
  • Outboard Marine Corp. v. Pezetel, Civ. A. No. 77-51.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • September 27, 1978
    ...immunity in an American court action involving the seizure of a commercial steamship owned by the Turkish government, The "Gul Djemal," 264 U.S. 90, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574 (1924), or those Cuban persons authorized by the Cuban government to seize and operate the cigar industry in Cuba w......
  • Banco Nacional Cuba v. Sabbatino, No. 16
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 23, 1964
    ...diplomatic relations, on the theory that under such circumstances comity did not require the granting of immunity. The case was affirmed, 264 U.S. 90, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574, but on another ground. 12. The doctrine that nonrecognition precludes suit by the foreign government in every ci......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc v. Republic of Cuba, No. 73-1288
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • December 10, 1974
    ...of state or indicate that the interventors had governmental, as opposed to merely commercial, authority for the refusal. The "Gul Djemal", 264 U.S. 90, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574. Pp. 691-694. (c) The interventors' counsel's statement during trial that the Cuban Government and the intervent......
  • Knox v. Palestine Liberation Organization, No. 03 Civ. 4466.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • March 1, 2004
    ...sovereign and determine rights in property ... upon the basis of these decrees."); The Gul Djemal, 296 F. 563, 564 (S.D.N.Y.1920), aff'd, 264 U.S. 90, 95, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574 (1924); Restatement (Third) § 204; see generally Stanley Lubman, The Unrecognized Government in American Cour......
  • Outboard Marine Corp. v. Pezetel, Civ. A. No. 77-51.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • September 27, 1978
    ...immunity in an American court action involving the seizure of a commercial steamship owned by the Turkish government, The "Gul Djemal," 264 U.S. 90, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574 (1924), or those Cuban persons authorized by the Cuban government to seize and operate the cigar industry in Cuba w......
  • Banco Nacional Cuba v. Sabbatino, No. 16
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 23, 1964
    ...diplomatic relations, on the theory that under such circumstances comity did not require the granting of immunity. The case was affirmed, 264 U.S. 90, 44 S.Ct. 244, 68 L.Ed. 574, but on another ground. 12. The doctrine that nonrecognition precludes suit by the foreign government in every ci......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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