Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

Steamship Stephanos v. Steamship Craiglee, 1906

[shipping, collision]

Steamship Stephanos v. Steamship Craiglee

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
15 December 1906
Source: The Times, 17 December 1906

 

LAW REPORT, DEC. 15.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.

(Present - LORD MACNAGHTEN, LORD DAVEY, LORD ATKINSON, SIR ANDREW SCOBLE, SIR ARTHUR WILSON, SIR GORELL BARNES, and SIR ALFRED WILLS.)

THE OWNERS OF THE STEAMSHIP STEPHANOS v. THE OWNERS OF THE STEAMSHIP CRAIGLEE.

This was an appeal from a judgment of his Britannic Majesty's Supreme Consular Court at Constantinople in its Vice-Admiralty jurisdiction of August 10, 1905.

Mr. Pickford, K.C., and Mr. Lewis Noad were counsel for the appellants; Mr. Aspinall, K.C., and Mr. D. Stephens for the respondents.

The case was recently argued before a Board composed of Lord Macnaghten, Lord Davey, Lord Robertson, Lord Atkinson, and Sir Gorell Barnes, with Admiral Lloyd, C.B., and Captain Caborne, C.B., as Nautical Assessors, when judgment was reserved.

SIR GORELL BARNES, in delivering their Lordships' judgment, said the suit arose in consequence of a collision between the Greek steamship Stephanos and the British steamship Craiglee about 8 p.m. on December 21, 1903, about seven or eight miles off Cape Malea.  Both vessels were damaged.  The Judge of the Consular Court, assisted by a Naval Assessor, found the Stephanos alone to blame.   At the time of the collision the Stephanos was on a voyage from the Black Sea to Barcelona with grain, and the Craiglee was in water ballast bound on a voyage to Constantinople for orders.  Both vessels were preceding in opposite directions at a speed of about eight knots, carrying their regulation lights, the weather being dark but clear. 

Reviewing the circumstances, their Lordships were of opinion that both vessels were to blame for the collision.  They thought that the order of the Consular Court should be discharged, that both vessels should be pronounced to have been in fault, and that the cause should be remitted to the consular Court for the purpose of ascertaining damages upon that footing, and that there should be no costs in the Court below.  Their Lordships would humbly advise his Majesty accordingly.  The parties would bear their own costs of this appeal.

Published by Centre for Comparative Law, History and Governance at Macquarie Law School