MARITIME LIEN FOR NECESSARIES TO FOREIGN SHIPS.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 3690, 30 July 1886, Page 3

MARITIME LIEN FOR NECESSARIES TO FOREIGN SHIPS.

It has been hitherto considered that a person supplying necessariea to a foreign ship had a maritime lien upon the vessel for the same, and could proceed by an action m rem m the court of the Admiralty, so that a claim for necessaries to a foreign ship might bo enforced against a bona fide purchaser. But m the recont case Northcote v Owners of the "Henrich Bjorn" at Home the House of Lords has decided that this view of the law 19 entirely erroneous. This was an action of London shipbrokers against tho owners of a Norwegian Tessel to recover' a sum of money as being due for necessaries supplied by them to theship at tho request of the muster, and for which they sued m rem. The defence was that since the goods were supplied the vessel had changed owners, and the question, therefore, was whether tho brokers could proceed against tho ship, or had only a remedy against her former owners. The plantiffs had succeeded m the Court of Admiralty, but failed m the Court of Appeal, and now again m the House of Lords. This judgment is of MlO utmost importance to those who supply necessaries to foreign ships m English ports, as it deprives them of their easiest and most effectual remedy. A ship can yery quickly change hands, and the right of suing a former owner, who is abroad, is a very different thing from a proceeding m rem i. c., against the ship itself. The House of Lords however, as ultimate Court pE Appeal, was not bound by the decision of the Courts below. It was admitted that there was no right of the maritime lien by common law, and the question turned upon the effect of the Statue (2 and 4 Vie, c. 65, b. 6). On this it is now held that thore is no maritime lien for the supply of necessaries to a foreign ship by the laws of England, Scotland, and Ireland, although there is m most other European countries.