Arrest of ship for necessaries dismissed due to non-compliance with affidavit requirements and procedural timing.
Cipro (CY)
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe court dismissed the ex parte application to arrest the vessel 'Alexandra' for goods sold as necessaries. The plaintiff failed to comply with Rule 52(b) by not stating that the ship's owners were not domiciled in Cyprus, and did not explicitly classify the claim as an action for necessaries. Furthermore, the court deemed it too late on a Saturday to amend the proceedings to allow for the warrant's execution at the distant port of Paphos.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IARule 52(h) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Cyprus in its Admiralty Jurisdiction; Rule 52(b) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Cyprus in its Admiralty Jurisdiction: An application for arrest of a ship for necessaries must strictly comply with affidavit requirements regarding owner domicile and the nature of the claim, and procedural amendments must be feasible within the time limits for warrant execution.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*1341] 1967 November
(JOSEPHIDES, J.)
ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION
Takis Th. Papadopoulos,
Plaintiff,
v.
s/s "Alexandra” and her cargo and/or
the owners of the ship "Alexandra”,
Defendants.
(Admiralty Action No.1 8/67).
Admiralty - Arrest of vessel - Action in rem - Claim for necessaries - Rule 52(h) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Cyprus in its Admiralty Jurisdiction.
Shipping - Ship - Arrest of ship - See under "Admiralty”.
P. Laoutas, for the Plaintiff-Applicant.
Ex-parte Application for the arrest of the defendant ship.
Mr. Lacutas states: The claim is based on goods sold and delivered to the master of the ship on the 6th November, 1967.
COURT; This action was filed today and as stated in the writ of summons the claim is for £222.795 mils ”value of goods sold and delivered51 to the defendants. The same thing is stated in the affidavit of applicant in support of the application for the issue of the warrant of arrest. The affidavit, further states that the ship has been in Cyprus since the 3rd November, that is, for the past 8 days, and that it is leaving today at 5 p.m. The affidavit does not show where, in which port, the ship is now to be found but Mr. Laoutas for the plaintiff has informed the court that it is to be found at Paphos. [*1342]
The affidavit does not comply with rule 52(b) to the effect that in an action for necessaries the affidavit should state, to the best of the deponent’s belief, that no owner or part owner of the ship was domiciled in Cyprus at the time when the necessaries were supplied. Furthermore, it is assumed that the goods sold and delivered are necessaries but nowhere, either in the writ of summons or in the affidavit, is it stated that the action is for necessaries. This being Saturday and 12 o'clock noon, I think it is too late in the day to have all these proceedings amended to enable the court to proceed with the issue of the warrant and its execution at the port of Paphos, 100 miles away, by 5 p.m.
In the circumstances, the application for the issue of the warrant for the arrest of the ship is dismissed.
Order in terms.