Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

The Yourri, 1885

[shipping]

The Yourri

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
10 February 1885
Source: The Times, 11 February 1885

 

LAW REPORT, FEB. 10.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.

(Present - LORD BLACKBURN, SIR BARNES PEACOCK, SIR ROBERT COLLIER, SIR RICHARD OUCH, and SIR ARTHUR HOBHOUSE.)

THE YOURRI.

This was an appeal from a decree of the Supreme Consular Court of Constantinople, in its Vice-Admiralty Jurisdiction, of the 14th February 1884.

Sir Walter Phillimore, Q.C., and Mr. Stubbs were counsel for the appellant; Mr. Webster, Q.C., and Mr. J. G. Barnes for the respondent.

The appellant, Captain A. B. Matwief, is the master of the Russian steamship Yourri, and the respondent, Captain R. B. Whytock, master of the steamship Spearman, of North Shields.  Cross actions were brought in the Consular Court at Constantinople by the parties for the recovery of damages in respect of a collision between the two vessels in the Danube on the 9th December, 1882.  At the time of the disaster the Yourri was on a voyage from Sistori to Odessa with a general cargo and passengers; and the Spearman was proceeding from Sulina to Galatz in ballast, both vessels being in charge of the Danube pilots.  The result of the collision was that the Yourri sank, and three of those on board her were drowned, and considerable damage was caused to the other vessel.

The actions were tried in February last before Mr. Fawcett, the Judge of the Consular Court, with Admiral Hobart Pasha and Captain Nicholson as nautical assessors; and the Court found that both ships were to blame for the collision - the Yourri for being navigated on the wrong side and the Spearman for not having lights exhibited after sunset - and ordered the owners of each vessel to pay half the damages sustained by the other.  From that judgment the captain of the Yourri now appealed.

Their LORDSHIPS, at the close of the argument for the appellant, and without calling on the counsel for the respondent, affirmed the judgment of the Consular Court, and dismissed the appeal, with costs.

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