ASPINALL’S MARITIME LAW CASES. 1 0 3 - Reports of Cases Relating to Maritime Law : containin

Ct. of App.] The Otranto. [Ct. of App. Tegard t o th e p o s itio n as i t pre sen te d it s e lf to

the co m m a n d e r o f th e O tranto. I t m a y be, n o w we ha ve w o rk e d o u t e v e ry th in g — th e tu r n in g circles, th e precise distances, th e Precise courses, a n d a ll th e re s t o f i t — i t m a y he t h a t i t can be sho w n t h a t s ta rb o a rd in g a b o u t th re e m in u te s b e fore th e c o llis io n was s ta r

h o a rd in g a t a tim e w h e n , m a th e m a tic a lly , i t Was possible fo r th e K ita n o M a r u b y h e r o w n un a id e d a c tio n to a v o id th e c o llis io n . I t m a y he so, a n d in t h a t sense th e tim e h a d n o t A rriv e d w h ic h e n title d th e m a s te r o f th e O tranto t o a c t. B u t t h a t is n o t th e w a y we m u s t lo o k a t i t . L o o k in g a t i t a ll ro u n d , was th e m a n , as a seam an, e n title d t o sa y t o h im - seii'. as a reasonable p ru d e n t m a n , ‘ has th e tu n e com e w h e n I c a n n o t a v o id a c tin g ? ’ I t h in k t h a t tim e h a d com e, a n d t h a t he was e n title d t o a c t. I c a n n o t, th e re fo re , sa y t h a t he a c te d to o soon.” T he T r i n i t y M asters agreed w it h h im , a n d o u r assessors ta k e th e same v ie w . W e asked t h e m : “ G iv e n th e plea ded courses a n d speeds a n d th e vessels a p p ro a c h in g on be a rin g s w h ic h do n o t change an d assum ing t h a t th e K ita n o M a r u , th e g iv e - w’ay s h ip , d id n o t a c t u n t il a fte r th e O tranto, a t a tim e o f a b o u t th re e m in u te s be fore th e c o llis io n a n d a d is ta n c e o f u n d e r th re e -q u a rte rs n r a m ile , h a d h a rd -a -s ta rb o a rd e d a n d b lo w n Wo b la s ts , (1) H a d th e tim e com e w h e n as a m a tte r o f go od seam anship th e O tranto m ig h t re a s o n a b ly b e lie v e t h a t c o llis io n c o u ld n o t be a v e rte d b y th e a c tio n o f th e K ita n o M a r u alone ? ” a n d th e y answ er : “ S u b m itte d — assu m in g th e q u e s tio n refers t o th e m o m e n t efore K ita n o M a r u h a d a lte re d course o r sou nd ed a n y h e lm s ig n a l a n d th e O tranto h a d mounded tw o bla s ts , w e t h in k t h a t (1) th e m a s te r w as ju s tifie d in ta k in g a c tio n t o a v o id r is k o f c o llis io n .” I confess I h a v e th e g ra v e s t d o u b t a b o u t th e correctness o f th is v ie w . i i 1 ta k e M r. J u s tic e H ills ’ s d is tin c tio n be tw een . .M a th e m a tic a lly ” a n d “ re a s o n a b ly ” t o m ean .j^at^ th o u g h in fa c t i t is seen a fte rw a rd s t h a t he “ g iv e -w a y ” s h ip c o u ld a n d w o u ld b y its o w n a c tio n ha ve a v o id e d th e c o llis io n i f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip h a d k e p t its course, y e t i f th e

<(ta n d -o n s h ip m ig h t re a s o n a b ly t h in k t h a t th e u g iv e -w a y ” s h ip w as n o t g o in g t o a c t, th e s ta n d -o n ” s h ip m ig h t a lte r its course o r Peed. T h is is I t h in k c o n tra r y t o D r . L u s h in g - on’ s v ie w as expressed in The Test (1847, 5 o t. o f Cas., 276), w h e re he says ( a t p . 278) t c a n n o t conceive t h a t a n y th in g w o u ld be

° r e lik e ly t o le a d t o m is c h ie v o u s conse

quences, th a n t o suppose t h a t a vessel, whose t ,u t y i t is t o keep h e r course, s h o u ld a n tic ip a te a t a n o th e r vessel w i ll n o t g iv e w a y , a n d so thVf W ay im rs c lf. T h e consequence w o u ld be, t l i t ' lere w o u ld be no c e r ta in ty ; w hereas, n e d o c trin e I ha ve u p h e ld , s u p p o rte d b y th e o f t v assessors’ a u t h o r ity , is t h a t , in cases th is d e s c rip tio n , y o u o u g h t a lw a y s to fo llo w fre? ®ener a l ru le . T h e c e r ta in ty w h ic h re s u lts o,;Un an adherence t o ge ne ral ru le s is, in m y u! ''! !'° m a b s o lu te ly esse ntia l t o th e s a fe ty o f t , ig a tio n .” A n d i t appears to m e to a lte r m nguage o f th e ru le fro m “ s h a ll a c t w h e n

c o llis io n c a n n o t be a v o id e d b y th e a c tio n o f th e g iv e -w a y s h ip a lon e,” to “ w h e n th e c a p ta in t h in k s re a s o n a b ly b u t w r o n g ly t h a t i t c a n n o t be a v o id e d b y th e a c tio n o f th e g iv e -w a y ship a lo n e .”

F u r th e r , I t h in k , such a v ie w o f th e fa c ts in th e p re s e n t case is in c o n s is te n t w i t h th e v ie w ta k e n b y th e H o use o f L o rd s in th e cases w h ere th e g iv e -w a y s h ip h e ld on t i l l she was ahead o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , a n d w o u ld , i f she c o n tin u e d h e r course, pass c le a r t o p o r t, b u t th e n p o rte d . One o f such cases is T he N o rm a n M o n a rc h ( The T im e s D ec. 10, 1918). A n o th e r a n d a v e r y s t r ik in g case is The O rdun a (su p .). I n t h a t case th e g iv e -w a y s h ip , th e K o n a k ry , on a course o f 17 degrees d iffe re n t fr o m t h a t o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip th e O rduna, k e p t o n h e r course t i l l she was ahead o f th e la tt e r a n d a q u a r te r o f a m ile o ff. T h e O rdun a t h in k in g t h a t th e K o n a k r y was g o in g to cross ahead, s ta rb o a rd e d t o g iv e h e r ro o m , b u t a t th e same tim e th e K o n a k r y p o r te d a n d w o u ld ha ve gone c le a r a s te rn o f th e O rd u n a b u t fo r th e OrduncCs s ta rb o a rd in g . T h e O rdun a w as h e ld t o b la m e b y a ll s ix assessors a n d b y th e C o u rt o f A p p e a l a n d th e H o use o f L o rd s . I t is said t h a t was because th e O rd u n a said i t w as c le a r t h a t th e re w as no r is k o f c o llis io n because th e K o n a k ry w as g o in g t o pass ahead.

B u t i t is s ta r tlin g t h a t w h e re a g iv e -w a y s h ip hqs g o t so fa r in h e r crossing course t h a t she is ahead o f th e s ta n d -o n sh ip , a n d th e la tt e r th in k s th e g iv e -w a y s h ip is c e rta in t o go cle ar, th e s ta n d -o n s h ip s h o u ld be c on de m ned fo r s ta rb o a rd in g ; b u t t h a t w h e n th e g iv e -w a y s h ip is th re e -a n d -a -h a lf p o in ts o n th e p o r t b o w a n d h a lf a m ile fr o m th e in te rs e c tin g lines o f th e o r ig in a l courses a n d th e s ta n d -o n ship is m e re ly d o u b tfu l w h a t th e g iv e -w a y s h ip is g o in g t o do, i t s h o u ld be excused. S im ila r ly in T he A th e n a a n d T he W a r B a h a d u r (14 L I . L . R e p . 516) w h e re th e g iv e -w a y s h ip g o t r ig h t ahead o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip an d th e n p o r te d a n d c o n tin u e d t o p o r t th o u g h th e s ta n d -o n s h ip b le w a s ta rb o a rd h e lm w h is tle th e s ta n d -o n s h ip was h e ld t o b la m e as h a v in g a c te d to o e a rly , a n d L o r d S u m n e r e x p la in e d t h a t th e re was n o th in g n e w in th e ju d g m e n ts in th e H o use o f L o rd s in The O rdun a, b u t m e re ly th e o ld a n d c o rre c t in te r p r e ta tio n o f th e crossing r u le . A s im ila r v ie w w as ta k e n b y t h is c o u r t in The V lr ik k a (su p .) w h e n th e s ta n d -o n s h ip a c te d w h e n th e g iv e -w a y s h ip was one a n d a h a lf t o tw o p o in ts o n th e p o r t b o w o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip a n d s h o w in g no signs o f g iv in g w a y , a n d th e s ta n d -o n ship was h e ld t o b la m e fo r s ta rb o a rd in g . D ecisions o f th e H o u se o f L o rd s o n fa c t are n o t s t r ic t ly b in d in g o n t h is c o u rt, b u t w h e n th e H o use o f L o rd s has th re e tim e s h e ld t h a t a p a r tic u la r set o f fa c ts , th e g iv e -w a y s h ip p r a c tic a lly ahead a n d s h o w in g n o signs o f g iv in g w a y , does n o t ju s t i f y th e s ta n d -o n s h ip in a lte r in g course, I t h in k i t w o u ld n o t be b e c o m in g in th e C o u rt o f A p p e a l t o h o ld t h a t a set o f fa c ts m u c h less fa v o u ra b le t o th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , t h a t is th e g iv e -w a y s h ip w e ll o n th e p o r t b o w a n d a t such a d is ta n c e t h a t she can in fa c t

Ct. of App.] The Otranto. [Ct. of App.

a v o id th e c o llis io n b y pa ssing a s te rn o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , excuses th e s ta n d -o n s h ip fo r a lte r in g course.

M y ju d g m e n t in The O rd u n a (su p .) I hope shows t h a t I a p p re c ia te th e d iffic u ltie s o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , h u t in v ie w o f th e a u th o ritie s , a n d t r e a tin g th e assessors as witnesses, as I a m t o ld t o do in The A u s tr a lia (17 A s p . M a r.

L a w Cas. 8 6 ; 135 L . T . R e p . 576 ; (1927) A . C. 145), a n d p a y in g due resp ect t o th e exp erience o f H i l l , J ., I s h o u ld h a v e g re a t d if f ic u lt y in a c c e p tin g h is c o n clu sio n t h a t th e s ta n d -o n s h ip was ju s tifie d in n o t k e e p in g he r course a n d speed. B u t I h a v e n o d iff ic u lt y in a c c e p tin g h is co n clu sio n , w i t h th e c on

c u rre n c e o f h is assessors, t h a t th e s ta n d -o n s h ip w as n o t ju s tifie d in s ta rb o a rd in g . O u r assessors to o k a n o p p o s ite v ie w t o th e ju d g e , a n d th e assessors b e lo w o n t h is p o in t. W e asked th e m , q u e s tio n B , r e c itin g th e p re v io u s fa c ts I h a v e a lre a d y re a d , “ I f so, was h a rd -a - s ta rb o a rd in g , w ith o u t re v e rs in g engines, good seam anship u n d e r th e circ u m s ta n c e s ? ” a n d th e y re p lie d “ t h a t h a rd -a -s ta rb o a rd in g , w ith o u t de creasing speed was good sea m an ship .” W e a re , th e re fo re , in th e p o s itio n discussed in The A u s tr a lia (sup .), a n d h a v e t o fo r m o u r o w n o p in io n o n th e c o n flic tin g evidence. I agree w i t h th e v ie w ta k e n b y H i l l , J ., a n d th e T r in i t y M a ste rs. T h e g iv e -w a y s h ip , i f i t obeys th e ru le , is to p o r t a n d pass u n d e r th e s te rn o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip . I n th e p re s e n t case, i t a cte d in tim e t o d o th is , a n d w o u ld h a v e a v o id e d th e c o llis io n b y its o w n a c tio n alon e, i f th e s ta n d - o n s h ip h a d k e p t its course a n d speed. F o r th e s ta n d -o n s h ip t o s ta rb o a rd is t o go in to th e w a te r w h ic h th e g iv e -w a y s h ip w i l l be tra v e rs in g , i f i t obeys th e ru le . T h is seems t o m e, as i t d id t o H i l l , J ., th e w o rs t t h in g th e s ta n d -o n s h ip can do, a n d I agree w i t h h im th e a c tio n th e s ta n d -o n s h ip s h o u ld ta k e g e n e ra lly is t o slacken speed, g iv in g m o re tim e t o th e g iv e -w a y s h ip t o ta k e a c tio n t o obey t h e ru le . S ta rb o a rd in g t o a s h ip ahead was co n d e m n e d in th e th re e H o use o f L o rd s decisions I h a v e m e n tio n e d . I t was c o n de m ned b y th is c o u r t in T he Z Jlrikka (sup .), w h e re th e g iv e -w a y s h ip w as o n e -a n d -a -h a lf t o tw o p o in ts o n th e p o r t b o w , s h o w in g a gre en lig h t , th e courses a b o u t 30 degrees a p a r t a n d th e ships 600yds.

a p a r t. I t has been re p e a te d ly c o n de m ned b y th e ju d g e b e lo w , (see The C lyne Rock, 17 L I . L . R e p . 311, a n d The L a n d p o rt, 25 L I . L . R e p . 16), in w h ic h la t t e r case, H i l l , J . said : “ I t is th e p la in t if fs ’ case w h ic h I a c c e p t t h a t th e M a th ild a p o rte d v e r y la te , b u t i t is p la in tiffs ’ plea ded case t h a t w h e n th e L a n d p o rt h a rd -a -s ta r- b o a rd e d th e M a th ild a 's b o w w as s t ill on th e L a n d p o rt's p o r t b o w . I h a v e n o t to con sid er w h e th e r s ta rb o a rd in g w o u ld h a v e been ju s tifie d i f th e L a n d p o rt h a d s ta rb o a rd e d a fte r th e M a th ild a h a d crossed t o s ta rb o a rd o f th e L a n d p o rt. T h e m a s te r o f th e L a n d p o rt was p u t in a p o s itio n o f g re a t d iff ic u lt y b y th e M a th ild a 's fa ilu r e to g iv e w a y a n d open h e r re d . B u t so is e v e ry s ta n d -o n s h ip w h e n th e g iv e -w a y s h ip is a p p a re n tly ta k in g n o a c tio n ; a n d in such cases, w h e n ships are on crossing |

courses, i f th e tim e f o r a c tio n b y th e s ta n d -o n s h ip has com e, th e a c tio n c a lle d f o r is t o ta k e o ff w a y . T o ta k e h e lm a c tio n a t th e same tim e m a y o r m a y n o t be ju s tifie d , a c c o rd in g t o th e c irc u m s ta n c e s o f th e case. I n m y o w n v ie w , i t is in ge ne ral n o t ju s tifie d in a crossing course, b u t t o ta k e h e lm w ith o u t en gine a c tio n is c e r ta in ly w ro n g . I f th e g iv e -w a y s h ip does a c t, th o u g h to o la te , th e n th e s ta n d -o n s h ip b y s ta rb o a rd in g defeats t h a t a c tio n . I f th e g iv e -w a y s h ip persists in crossing ahead, th e s ta n d -o n s h ip b y re v e rs in g gives th e g iv e -w a y s h ip m o re tim e t o g e t across. O ne a lw a y s s y m p a th ise s w i t h th e m a n in cha rge o f a s ta n d - o n s h ip , w h o is b o u n d t o keep h is course an d speed u p t o a p o in t, a n d m u s t th e n a c t so as b e s t t o a v o id a c o llis io n ; b u t s ta rb o a rd in g w ith o u t re v e rs in g is t o ta k e th e w o rs t possible a c tio n .” I e n tir e ly agree w it h th is . I n m y v ie w , t o h o ld t h a t a s ta n d -o n s h ip m a y s ta r

b o a rd , w h e n she does n o t k n o w w h a t a g iv e -w a y s h ip on h e r p o r t b o w is g o in g t o do, a n d w h e n th e distances are such t h a t th e g iv e -w a y s h ip , b y h e r o w n a c tio n , can in fa c t, b y p o r tin g , a v o id th e c o llis io n , th o u g h th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , b y e rro r o f ju d g m e n t, t h in k s she c a n n o t, w ill cre a te hopeless c o n fu s io n a t sea.

I do n o t t h in k th e case is m ad e a n y b e t te r b y th e s ta n d -o n s h ip ’ s s ig n a llin g “ I a m g o in g t o b re a k th e r u le b y s ta rb o a rd in g .” T h e o n ly case I h a v e fo u n d in w h ic h s ta rb o a rd in g b y th e s ta n d -o n s h ip has been excused, is T he R a y fo rd (10 L I . L . R e p . 743), in w h ic h th e C o u rt o f A p p e a l to o k th e v ie w t h a t th e s ta r

b o a rd in g was so s lig h t i t d id n o t a ffe c t t h e c o llis io n . M y ju d g m e n t in t h a t case shows, I hope, t h a t I a p p re c ia te th e d iffic u ltie s o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip a n d a m desirous o f h e lp in g her, i f I can. B u t I t h in k th e re m e d y is a lte r in g th e r u le b y le g is la tio n , n o t w h it t lin g i t a w a y b y ju d ic ia l decisio n. I , th e re fo re , agree w ith th e le a rn e d ju d g e b e lo w t h a t th e O tranto w as t o b la m e fo r n o t k e e p in g h e r course.

I t w as, h o w e v e r, a rg u e d t h a t w e s ho uld v a r y th e a p p o rtio n m e n t b y th e ju d g e be lo w , w h o h a d fo u n d eq u a l p ro p o rtio n s o f b lam e . I t h in k th e e ffe c t o f th e decisions in The P eter B e n o it (13 A s p . M a r L a w Cas. 203 ; 114 L . T . R e p . 147), a n d T he K a ra m o a (su p .) is t h a t th e s u p e rio r c o u rts w i ll n o t a lte r th e a p p o rtio n m e n t o f th e t r i a l ju d g e , unless th e y disagree w i t h h im on a q u e s tio n o f fa c t o r la w s u b s ta n tia lly a ffe c tin g th e re s u lt. I n th e p re s e n t case, th e o n ly d iffe re n c e I h a v e w it h th e le a rn e d ju d g e is t h a t I d o u b t h is v ie w t h a t th e O tranto, th o u g h m is ta k e n m a th e m a tic a lly in t h in k in g t h a t th e c o llis io n c o u ld n o t be a v o id e d b y th e g iv e -w a y s h ip alone, was ju s tifie d as a m a tte r o f seam anship in n o t ke e p in g course an d speed. T h is diffe re n ce is a g a in s t th e O tranto r a th e r th a n in h e r fa v o u r. I am u n a b le , th e re fo re , t o a lte r th e a p p o rtio n m e n t.

I s h a ll be d e lig h te d i f t h is case gives an o p p o r tu n ity t o th e H o u se o f L o rd s t o g iv e c le a re r gu id a n ce t o th e crossing ships as t o t h e ir re s p e c tiv e d u tie s . B u t in th is case, on th e v ie w I ta k e , th e ap pe al m u s t be dism issed.

A s, h o w e v e r, m y b ro th e rs d o n o t ta k e t h is

ASPINALL’S MARITIME LAW CASES.

1 0 5 Ct. of App.]

v ie w , ju d g m e n t m u s t be e n te re d as proposed b y th e m .

Lawrence, L . J . — H i l l , J . has h e ld “ b o th to b la m e ” f o r th e c o llis io n w h ic h to o k place betw een th e O tranto a n d th e K ita n o M a r u in th e N o r t h Sea o ff th e m o u th o f th e H u m b e r

?n th e e v e n in g o f th e 1 1 th A u g . 1928, r e s u ltin g 111 dam age t o b o th vessels.

T h e O tranto has ap pealed o n th e g ro u n d t h a t th e le a rn e d ju d g e was w ro n g in a t t r ib u t in g any , o r in th e a lte r n a tiv e as m u c h as one h a lf,

° f th e b la m e t o h e r.

T h e K ita n o M a r u served a n o tic e o f cross appeal, b u t t h is was s u b s e q u e n tly w ith d r a w n a n d th e fin d in g s o f fa c t in th e c o u r t b e lo w as to th e n e g lig e n t m a n n e r in w h ic h t h a t vessel w as n a v ig a te d w ere n o t c h a lle ng ed in th is c o u rt.

I t is c o m m o n g ro u n d t h a t th e tw o vessels concerned w ere crossing vessels in v o lv in g th e ris k o f c o llis io n a n d t h a t a rts . 19, 2 1, 2 2, 23, a n d 27 o f th e re g u la tio n s o f 1910 c o n ta in th e M a te ria l d ire c tio n s w h ic h h a d t o be observed b y th e m re s p e c tiv e ly . T h e K ita n o M a r u was th e g iv e -w a y s h ip . She was v e r y b a d ly n a v ig a te d a n d c o m m itte d breaches o f a rts . 19 a n d 23 b y n o t k e e p in g o u t o f th e w a y o f th e O tranto a n d b y n o t s la c k e n in g h e r speed o r s to p p in g o r re v e rs in g o n a p p ro a c h in g th e O tranto.

T h e le a rn e d ju d g e has a c q u itte d th e O tranto

° f a n y b re a c h o f th e d u t y im p o se d o n h e r b y a r t. 2 1, as th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , t o keep h e r course a n d speed, b u t has h e ld t h a t in th e P o s itio n in w h ic h she fo u n d h e rs e lf h a rd -a - s ta rb o a rd in g was a n a c t o f negligence. T h e h rs t q u e s tio n w h ic h i t is m a te r ia l to con sid er

*s w h e th e r th e le a rn e d ju d g e was r ig h t in h o ld in g t h a t th e tim e h a d com e w h e n th e O tranto was c a lle d u p o n to d e p a rt fr o m h e r P n m d fa c ie d u t y o f k e e p in g h e r course a n d sP®®d a n d t o ta k e a c tio n in o rd e r t o a v o id c o llisi on T h e a n sw e r to t h is q u e s tio n depends P a r tly u p o n th e c o n s tru c tio n o f a r t . 21 a n d P a r tly u Po n Ib e p a r tic u la r fa c ts o f t h is case.

I he le a rn e d ju d g e has h e ld t h a t o n th e tr u e c o n s tru c tio n o f a r t . 21 th e m a s te r o f th e sta n d -

° h vessel is a llo w e d some la titu d e in d e te r

m in in g w h e n th e tim e has a r r iv e d to ta k e act io n u n d e r th e n o te . I n m y ju d g m e n t th is conclu sion is r ig h t a n d in accordance w it h th e a u th o ritie s . I t is cle a r, h o w e v e r, t h a t th e a llo w a b le m a rg in is v e r y n a rro w a n d t h a t th e onus o f p r o v in g t h a t a c tio n is ta k e n w it h in n a t m a rg in rests h e a v ily o n th e s ta n d -o n s h ip . , .b in , L . J . (as he th e n w as) in The U lr ik k a i “ L I . L . R e p . a t p . 368) says w it h g re a t orce t h a t a rts . 19 a n d 21 are a b r ig h t lig h t to a v ig a to rs ; t h a t he supposes d a y b y d a y a n d o u r b y h o u r th e y o p e ra te t o p re v e n t c o llis io n s 1 sea, a n d t h a t i t appears to h im o f th e h ig h e s t U 'p o rta n c e t o en force th e m s t r ic t ly .

Lases such as The O rdun a (su p .), The N o rm a n onarch (sup .), a n d 'The A th e n a (14 L I . L . R e p .

° ), to w h ic h I s h a ll ha ve occasion t o re fe r n" HJn la te r, are s t r ik in g exa m ples o f th e s tr ic t- ess w it h w h ic h a r t . 21 has been e n forced b y le c o u rt. T h is a r tic le , w h e n rea d in its

Vol. X V I I I . , N . S.

[Ct. of App.

p ro p e r s e ttin g , is p la in ly d ire c te d to th e av o id a n c e o f th e r is k o f c o llis io n as w e ll as t o th e p re v e n tio n o f c o llis io n . T h e f ir s t a n d m a in d ire c tio n is t h a t th e s ta n d -o n ship s h a ll keep h e r course a n d speed a n d th e second d ire c tio n , w h ic h , a lth o u g h o n ly c o n ta in e d in th e n o te , is fra m e d in e q u a lly im p e ra tiv e language, is t h a t th e s ta n d -o n s h ip s h a ll ta k e such a c tio n as w i ll b e s t a id t o a v e r t c o llis io n w h e n she fin d s h e rs e lf so close t h a t c o llis io n c a n n o t be a v o id e d b y th e a c tio n o f th e g iv in g w a y vessel alone. T h e jo in t e ffe ct o f these tw o d ire c tio n s is t h a t th e fir s t d u t y o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip is to keep h e r course a n d speed u p t o th e p o in t w h e n th e g iv e -w a y s h ip is n o lo n g e r ab le t o keep o u t o f th e w a y ; w h e n t h a t p o in t is reached h e r second d u t y is t o ta k e such a c tio n as w i ll be st a id t o a v e r t c o llis io n (see The R anza 79 L . J . 21 (« )). These d ire c tio n s a re addressed t o p r a c tic a l seamen a n d th e y m u s t be c o n s tru e d so t h a t th e y m a y re a s o n a b ly be a c te d u p o n . T h e n a tu re o f th e e v e n t up on th e h a p p e n in g o f w h ic h th e s ta n d -o n s h ip is t o ta k e a c tio n shows t h a t th e ru le c a n n o t re a s o n a b ly be c o n s tru e d as re fe rrin g t o th e precise m o m e n t o f tim e w h e n on a m a th e m a tic a l c a lc u la tio n th e g iv e -w a y s h ip c o u ld in fa c t n o lo n g e r a v o id c o llis io n , w h ic h in m o s t cases w o u ld depend in some m easure u p o n fa c to rs th e n u n k n o w n t o th e n a v ig a to r o f th e s ta n d -o n s h ip , such as, fo r in s ta n c e , th e tu r n in g c irc le o f th e g iv e -w a y s h ip . U nless some la titu d e be a llo w e d t o th e s ta n d -o n s h ip h e r n a v ig a to r w o u ld be p lace d in th e un rea sona ble p o s itio n o f c o m m ittin g a b re a c h o f one o r o th e r o f th e d u tie s im p ose d u p o n h im b y t h is a r tic le unless he s h o u ld h a p p e n b y some lu c k y a c c id e n t to h i t o ff th e e x a c t m a th e m a tic a l m o m e n t o f tim e w h e n th e g iv e -w a y s h ip in fa c t fir s t becam e u n a b le t o a v o id c o llis io n — a m a tte r w h ic h c o u ld n o t be a s c e rta in e d u n t il a fte r th e c o llis io n a n d a fte r th e r e le v a n t circu m sta nce s h a d been in v e s tig a te d . T h e fo llo w in g a u th o r i

tie s , in m y o p in io n , s u p p o rt th e le a rn e d ju d g e ’ s c o n s tru c tio n . I n The R a nza (sup .), w here i t was co n te n d e d t h a t th e s ta n d -o n s h ip h a d k e p t h e r course a n d speed to o lo n g , G o re ll B arn es, J . says a t p . 22 : “ W h a t is th e d u t y o f a vessel in th e p o s itio n o f th e G loa m in ” — th e sta n d -o n s h ip — “ w it h re g a rd t o a vessel in th e p o s itio n o f th e R anza ” — th e g iv e -w a y s h ip . “ T h e Ranza h a d t o kee p o u t o f th e w a v a n d th e G lo a m in h a d t o keep h e r course a n d speed o b v io u s ly u p to a c e rta in p o in t. I t is q u ite im p o ssib le t o be a b s o lu te ly c e rta in w h e re t h a t p o in t is, m a th e m a tic a lly spe aking, b u t these ru le s ” — n a m e ly , a rts . 21 a n d 27— “ ha ve to be co n s tru e d so t h a t m en m a y a c t re a s o n a b ly u p o n th e m .” T h e le a rn e d ju d g e in t h a t case, no d o u b t, h a d h is m in d d ire c te d t o th e m a rg in o f tim e w h ic h s h o u ld be a llo w e d t o th e s ta n d - on s h ip a fte r th e m o m e n t h a d a r riv e d w h e n th a t, s h ip fo u n d h e rs e lf so close t h a t c o llis io n c o u ld n o t be a v o id e d b y th e a c tio n o f th e g iv e -w a y s h ip alone, b u t th e same rea so n in g ap plies to th e m a rg in o f tim e w h ic h s h o u ld be a llo w e d to th e s ta n d -o n s h ip b e fore t h a t p o in t has been reached.

The Otranto.

Ct. of App.] The Otranto. [Ct. of App.

I n The A lb a n o (10 A s p . M a r. L a w Cas. 365 ; 0 6 L . T . R e p . 335 ; (1907) A . C. 193) th e P r iv y C o u n c il h a d to co n sid e r th e C a na dia n re g u la tio n s w h ic h so fa r as m a te ria l are id e n tic a l w it h th e re g u la tio n s o f 1910 a n d in th e ju d g m e n t o f t h e b o a rd (d e liv e re d b y S ir G o re ll B a rn e s) a fte r a reference to th e d iff ic u lt y in w h ic h th e m a s te r o f a s ta n d -o n ship is p lace d in d e te rm in in g w h e n th e tim e has a r r iv e d fo r h im to ta k e a c tio n th e re is th e fo llo w in g passage : “ T h e re fo re he m u s t keep h is course a n d speed u p to some p o in t, an d th e n a c t, b u t th e precise p o in t m u s t n e cessa rily be d iff ic u lt to d e te rm in e , a n d some l i t t l e la titu d e has t o be a llo w e d t o th e m a s te r in d e te rm in in g th is . ” I n The O ly m p ic a n d H .M .S . H a w ke (su p .), V a u g h a n W illia m s , L . J . says (1913, P . a t p . 245) : “ I a m in c lin e d t o t h in k t h a t in a case w h e re good seam anship w o u ld assume t h a t c o llis io n c a n n o t be a vo id e d b y th e a c tio n o f th e g iv in g -a w a y vessel alone, th e case fa lls w it h in th e e x c e p tio n ,” n a m e ly , t h e e x c e p tio n t o th e ru le t o keep course a n d speed, “ even th o u g h in fa c t th e g iv in g -w a y vessel c o u ld b y h e r o w n a c tio n ha ve a v e rte d c o llis io n ,” a n d in th e same case L o r d P a rk e r a t p . 279. says : “ A vessel w h ic h u n d e r th e crossing ru le has t o keep o u t o f th e w a y o f a n o th e r vessel m u s t a c t b e fo re th e re be a c tu a l da n g e r. I f she a llo w s th e tim e fo r a c tin g to go b y she m a y le a d th e o th e r vessel t o suppose t h a t she c a n n o t o r does n o t in te n d t o a c t. I n s u c h a case th e la t t e r vessel m a y be re lie v e d fr o m th e re c ip ro c a l o b lig a tio n o f m a in ta in in g h e r o w n course a n d speed.” B a n ke s, L . J . , in The O rdun a c o m m e nts (1919) P . a t p . 390) on t h is la tt e r s ta te m e n t a n d observes t h a t such a case o u g h t t o be s c ru tin is e d w it h th e gre a te st c a re a n d t h a t a person m u s t m a k e i t a b u n d a n tly p la in t h a t he was ju s tifie d in ta k in g u p th e

W dokumencie Reports of Cases Relating to Maritime Law : containing all the decisions of the courts of law and equity in the United Kingdom, and selections from the more important decisions in the colonies and the United States, 1937 Vol. 18 (Stron 121-127)