Salvage right
Salvage right legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Law firm (appellant) were engaged by a company for pleading an admiralty suit in connection with a vessel which had been arrested for recovery of some outstanding amount
Plea of law firm that services rendered by it not only salvaged the vessel but also preserved the interest of their client-company, therefore, it was entitled to a charge thereon; that law firm had a salvage right which could be enforced under S. 3 of Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance, 1980; that S. 69 of Solicitors Act, 1932 also recognized the enforceability of such right in the Admiralty jurisdiction of High Court
Validity
Record showed that vessel in question stood arrested before the law firm stepped into the arena
Vessel was no more in a state of danger when the law firm, instituted a suit on behalf of its client-company
Law firm in such context could not be treated as a salvor nor could it be said to have recovered or preserved something in a time of danger, by its labour or work
Even if the law firm preserved and protected interest of client-company, it was at a later stage, which did not make it a salvor by any attribute so as to entitle it to a charge in the nature of salvage right
Solicitors Act, 1932, was not in force in the country, and even it was, it would not entitle the law firm to a salvage right since at no stage of the proceedings, the court trying the lis declared that the services rendered by the law firm proved instrumental in recovering or preserving the property
In the absence of such declaration, which was sine qua non in terms of S. 69 of the Solicitors Act, 1932 for the enforcement of such right, the law firm could not on its own don the attire of a salvor and ask for the enforcement of such right
Appeal was dismissed accordingly.
Law firm (appellant) were engaged by a company for pleading an admiralty suit in connection with a vessel which had been arrested for recovery of some outstanding amount
Plea of law firm that services rendered by it not only salvaged the vessel but also preserved the interest of their client-company, therefore, it was entitled to a charge thereon; that law firm had a salvage right which could be enforced under S. 3 of Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance, 1980; that S. 69 of Solicitors Act, 1932 also recognized the enforceability of such right in the Admiralty jurisdiction of High Court
Validity
Record showed that vessel in question stood arrested before the law firm stepped into the arena
Vessel was no more in a state of danger when the law firm, instituted a suit on behalf of its client-company
Law firm in such context could not be treated as a salvor nor could it be said to have recovered or preserved something in a time of danger, by its labour or work
Even if the law firm preserved and protected interest of client-company, it was at a later stage, which did not make it a salvor by any attribute so as to entitle it to a charge in the nature of salvage right
Solicitors Act, 1932, was not in force in the country, and even it was, it would not entitle the law firm to a salvage right since at no stage of the proceedings, the court trying the lis declared that the services rendered by the law firm proved instrumental in recovering or preserving the property
In the absence of such declaration, which was sine qua non in terms of S. 69 of the Solicitors Act, 1932 for the enforcement of such right, the law firm could not on its own don the attire of a salvor and ask for the enforcement of such right
Appeal was dismissed accordingly.
"Salvage right", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124942368
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Salvage right"
2013 C L D 1815
SURRIDGE AND BEECHENO — Appellant Versus M.T. EASTERN NAVIGATOR and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan2013 S C M R 1533
SURRIDGE AND BEECHENO — Appellant Versus M.T. EASTERN NAVIGATOR and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan1988 C L C 2377
Messrs ALEXANDER G. TAAVLIRIS & SONS‑‑Plaintiff Versus m.v. 'RICE TRADER' and 2 others‑‑Defendants
Court: Karachi2005 C L D 1640
C.I.T. GROUP/CAPITAL EQUIPMENT FINANCING INC. — Plaintiff Versus M.T. EASTERN NAVIGATOR and another — Defendants
Court: KarachiP L D 1994 Quetta 51
SEMCO SALVAGE PTE. LTD ;Plaintiff Versus M.V. KAPTAN YUSUF KALKAVAN through
Court:1989 M L D 1615
HADI DASTBAZ, SIND CLUB‑‑Plaintiff Versus m. v. RICE TRADER and another — ‑Defendants
Court: Karachi1987 M L D 674
m.v. DAL CARRIER — Appellant Versus Messrs ALEXANDER G. TSAVLIRIS and Sons — Respondent
Court: Karachi1995 M L D 706
SEMCO SALVAGE PTE LIMITED‑‑‑‑Appellant Versus m.v. KAPTAN YUSUF KALKAVAN TURKISH and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Quetta2019 Y L R 1985
NAZEER AHMED and another — Plaintiffs Versus KARACHI PORT TRUST through Chairman Karachi Port Trust, Karachi and 2 others — Defendants
Court: Sindh1992 C L C 143
m.v. KAPTAN YOUSUF KALKAVAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus SEMCO SALVAGE PTD Ltd.‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Quetta