header-logo header-logo

03 February 2011
Issue: 7451 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Shipping

Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 24, [2011] All ER (D) 201 (Jan)

There was no rule of law that piratical seizure of a vessel was automatically an actual total loss (ATL). The correct approach was to “wait and see”.  Piratical seizure where there was not only a chance, but a strong likelihood that payment of a comparatively small sum relative to the value of the vessel and her cargo as ransom, would secure its recovery, was not an ATL. It was not an irretrievable deprivation of property. It was a typical “wait and see” situation. The facts would not have supported a claim for ATL, for the test was unlikelihood of recovery. Further, there was no general rule that capture of seizure was an ATL. It might, in the absence of a policy of ransom amount to an ATL, where the pirates escaped with their prize and there was no prospect whatever of finding or recovering vessel or cargo, but where a chance of recapture remains even such a seizure would not give rise

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll