Robin Line Steamship Co. v. Canadian Stevedoring Co.

Robin Line Steamship Co. v. Canadian Stevedoring Co.

The typed addendum (clause C) that expressly stipulated that the charterers would load and stow the cargo at a fixed rate superseded any implication of actual authority in clause 15 to nominate stevedores on behalf of owners; further, there was no ostensible authority because there was no holding out by the owners nor proof of a custom, and the stevedore had means to learn the charter terms; accordingly owners were not liable and the appeals were allowed.

Citation
[1928] SCR 423
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Robin Line Steamship Company; Appellant (defendant): Seas Shipping Company; Respondent (plaintiff): Canadian Stevedoring Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 1928
Procedural Posture
Appeal Civil Maritime Matter (charter Party/stevedoring) / Final Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of Appeal reversed; actions dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Space Charter Party, Stevedoring, Actual Agency, Ostensible Agency, Charter Party Construction, Liability of Shipowner
Source Language
English
Maritime Law Agency Law Contract Law Commercial Law Space Charter Party Stevedoring Actual Agency Ostensible Agency +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robin Line Steamship Company

Appellant (defendant)

Seas Shipping Company

Appellant (defendant)

Canadian Stevedoring Company

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Appeal Civil Maritime Matter (charter Party/stevedoring) / Final Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charterer was actual agent of the shipowners such that owners were liable to the stevedore
  2. 2 Whether there was ostensible (apparent) authority of the charterer to bind the owners
  3. 3 Proper construction of charter-party clauses (clause 15, addendum C, clause 32)

Ratio Decidendi

The typed addendum (clause C) that expressly stipulated that the charterers would load and stow the cargo at a fixed rate superseded any implication of actual authority in clause 15 to nominate stevedores on behalf of owners; further, there was no ostensible authority because there was no holding out by the owners nor proof of a custom, and the stevedore had means to learn the charter terms; accordingly owners were not liable and the appeals were allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Court of Appeal reversed; actions dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs in the Supreme Court of Canada and in the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
  • Judgments below set aside and actions dismissed with costs in favour of appellants