Allanwilde Transport Corp. v. Vacuum Oil Co.

1919-01-13
Share:

Headline: Court upholds carrier’s right to keep prepaid freight after storm and wartime government ban, leaving shippers to absorb extra costs when contracts say freight is earned and nonrefundable.

Holding:

Real World Impact:
  • Allows carriers to keep prepaid freight when contracts state freight is earned and nonrefundable.
  • Shippers may need to pay higher costs to forward goods if voyage is interrupted.
  • Encourages shippers to negotiate refund or contingency terms before prepaid shipment.
Topics: maritime shipping, prepaid freight, government embargo, voyage interruption

Summary

Background

A shipping company operated the sailing ship Allanwilde and carried paid cargo for an oil company and a seller of nails. Both shippers paid freight in advance. The ship left New York on September 11, met a severe storm that forced her back to New York for repairs, and then the Government refused clearance to sailing vessels bound for the war zone. The captain learned of the ban only after returning; the carrier unloaded the cargo under protest when it could not get clearance. The oil was later forwarded by another vessel at higher cost; what happened to the nails is not stated.

Reasoning

The core question was whether the parties’ written contracts covered these events and allowed the carrier to keep the prepaid freight. The Court looked to the charter and bills of lading, which said freight was “earned, retained and irrevocable” and exempted the carrier for “arrest or restraint of governments.” The Court found the clauses were deliberate, applied when the voyage was broken up by storm and by an indefinite government interdiction, and that the carrier acted in good faith trying to repair and obtain clearance. On those grounds the Court answered the certified questions in the carrier’s favor.

Real world impact

The ruling means that when shipping contracts plainly say prepaid freight is earned and nonrefundable and they include government-restraint language, carriers can keep those payments if storms and official bans prevent the voyage. Shippers who pay in advance may face extra costs and should negotiate refund or contingency terms.

Ask about this case

Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).

What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?

How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?

What are the practical implications of this ruling?

Related Cases