2.
There are four possibilities under which an accident of this sort may
occur. 1. It may happen without blame being imputable to either party,
as when the loss is occasioned by a storm, or any other vis major; in
that case the loss must be borne by the party on whom it happens to
light, the other not being responsible to him in, any degree.
3.
- 2. Both parties may be to blame, as when there has been a want of due
diligence or of skill on both sides; in such cases, the loss must be
apportioned between them, as having been occasioned by the fault of both
of them. 6 Whart. R. 311..
4. - 3. The suffering party may have been the cause of the injury, then he must bear the loss.
5.
- 4. It may have been the fault of the ship which ran down the other;
in this case the injured party would be entitled to an entire
corapensation from the other. 2 Dodson's Rep. 83, 85; 3 Hagg. Adm. R.
320; 1 .How. S. C. R. 89. The same rule is applied to steamers.. Id.
414.
6.
- 5. Another case has been put, namely, when there has been some fault
or neglect, but on which side the blame lies, is uncertain. In this
case, it does not appear to be settled whether the loss shall be
apportioned or borne by the suffering party opinions on this subject are
divided.
7.
A collision between two ships on the high seas, whether it be the
result of accident or negligence, is, in all cases, to be deemed a peril
of the seas within the meaning of a policy of insurance. 2 Story, R.
176; 3 Sumn. R. 889. Vide, generally, Story, Bailm. 607 to 612; Marsh..
Ins. B. 1, c. 12, s. 2; Wesk. Ins. art. Running Foul; Jacobsen's Sea
Laws, B. 4, c. 1; 4 Taunt. 126; 2 Chit. Pr. 513, 535; Code de Com. art.
407; Boulay-Paty, Cours de Dr. Commercial, tit. 12, s. 6; Pard. n. 652
to 654; Pothier, Avaries, n. 155; 1 Emerig. Assur. ch. 12, 14.
No comments:
Write comments