Collision

In maritime law. The act of ships or vessels striking together,, or of one vessel running against or foul of another. As ordinarily used, it includes "allision" (q. V.)

The act of ships or vessels striking together, or of one vessel running against or foul of another. It may happen without fault, no blame being Imputable to those in charge of either vessel. In such case, In the English, American, and French courts, each party must bear his own loss; Pardessus, Droit Cumin, p. 4, t. 2, c. 2, § 4; General Mutual Ins. Co. v. Sherwood, 14 How. (l.\ S.) 352, 14 L. Ed. 452; 1 Pars. Sh. & Adm. 525. A collision by inevitable accident is when a collision is caused exclusively by natural causes, without any fault on the part of the owners or those in charge; The Sea Gull, 23 Wall. (U. S.) 169, 23 L. Ed. 90; Killam v. Eri, 3 Cliff. 456, led. ('as. No. 7.7G5; Sampson v. U. S., 12 Ct. CI. 4S0. It must appear that neither vessel was in fault; Sterling v. The Jennie Cushman, 3 Cliff. G3G, Fed. Cas. No. 13,375. Where the captain and crew, except the second mate, were taken sick, and a collision occurred, through the absence of a lookout, it was held to be inevitable accident; The Southern Home, 8 Reporter 3S9, Fed. Cas. No. 13,187. See also The F. W. Gifford, 7 Biss. 249, Fed. Cas. No. 5,166. It may happen by mutual fault, that is, by the misconduct, fault, or negligence of those in charge of both vessels; The C. R. Stone, 49 Fed. 475; The Brinton, 50 Fed. 5S1; The T. B. Van Houten, 50 Fed. 590; The Riversdale, 53 Fed. 2S6; The Allen Green, 60 Fed. 459, 9 C. C. A. 73. In such case, neither party has relief at common law; 3 Kent 231; 3 C. & P. 528; Barnes v. Cole, 21 Wend. (N. Y.) 1S8; Hartfield v. Roper, 21 Wend. (N. Y.) 615, 34 Am. Dec. 273; Brown v. Maxwell, 6 Hill (N. Y.) 592, 41 Am. Dec. 771; Parker v. Adams, 12 Mete. (Mass.) 415, 46 Am. Dec. 694 (though now otherwise in England by the Judicature Act 1S73); but the maritime courts aggregate the damages to both vessels and their cargoes, and then divide the same equally between the two vessels; 3 Kent 232; The Teutonia, 23 Wall. (U. S.) 84, 23 L. Ed. 44; The Clara, 49 Fed. 765; The State of California, 49 Fed. 172, 1 C. C. A. 224; The Bolivia, 49 Fed. 169, 1 C. C. A. 221; Fristad v. The Premier, 51 Fed. 766; The Marion, 56 Fed. 271; The Manitoba, 122 U. S. 97, 7 Sup. Ct. 1158, 30 L. Ed. 1095. See 1 Swab. 00. Where two tugs and two scows in tow by one of them are all in fault, each is liable for an equal share of the damages, even though more than one be owned by the same person; The Eugene F. Moran, 212 U. S. 466, 29 Sup. Ct. 339, 53 L. Ed. 600. Where the collision is by intentional wrong of both parties, the libel will be dismissed; The R. L. Maybey, 4 Blatch. 88, Fed. Cas. No. 11,- 870. It may happen by inscrutable fault, that is, by the fault of those in charge of one or who is in fault. In such <ase the American courts of admiralty and the Eur maritime courts form< rlj ■' i ■] the rule of an equal division of the damage; The Comet, 1 Abb. I No. 3,050; The Scioto, 2 Wai 360, Fed. Cas. No. 12,508; I Mar. Law, L".)<;. The English com I a remedy in admiralty; 2 Hagg. Adm. 145; 6 Thornt. 240; and see The K 128, Fed. Cas. No. 7,600; but it has decided by a vast preponderance of authority that there can be no recovery or partial recovery unless fault be affirmatively shown; The Jumna, 149 Fed. 173, 79 C. C. A. 119, following The Clara, 102 U. S. 200, 26 L. Ed. 115; The Sunnyside, 91 U. S. 208, s.; L. Ed. 302. It may happen by the fault of those belonging to one of the colliding vessels, without any fault being imputable to the vessel. In such case the owners of the vessel iu fault must bear the damage which their own vessel has sustained, and are liable as well as their master to a claim for compensation from the owners of the other vessel for the damage done to her; 1 Swab. 23. 173, 200,211; 3 W. Rob. 2S3; The Narragansett, I Blatchf. 211, Fed. Cas. No. 10.017; Vantine v. The Lake, 2 Wall. Jr. 52, Fed. Cas. No. 16,S7S; Smith v. Condry, 1 How. (U. S.) 2S,

In maritime law. The act of ships or vessels striking together.

In its strict sense, collision means the impact of two vessels both moving, and is distinguished from allision, which designates the striking of a moving vessel against one that is stationary. But collision is used in a broad sense, to include allision, and perhaps other species of encounters between vessels. Wright v. Brown, 4 Ind. 97, 58 Am. Dec. 622; London Assur. Co. v. Companhla De Moagens, 68 Fed. 258, 15 C. C. A. 379, Towing Co. v. Ætna Ins. Co., 23 App. Div. 152, 48 N. Y. Supp. 927. The term is not inapplicable to cases where a stationary vessel is struck by one under way, strictly termed "allision;" or where one vessel is brought into contact with another by swinging at anchor. And even an injury received by a vessel at her moorings, in consequence of being violently rubbed or pressed against by a second vessel lying along-side of her, in consequence of a collision against such second vessel by a third one under way, may be compensated for, under the general head of "collision," as well as an injury which is the direct result of a "blow," properly so calied The Moxey, Abb. Adm. 73, Fed. Cas. No. 9,894.

A striking, or running together with running foul of vessels, v. Allision.

In maritime law. The act of ships or vessels striking together.

In its strict sense, collisiun means the impact of two vessels both moving, and is distinguished from ailision, which designates the striking of a moving vessel against one that is stationary. But collision is used in a broad sense, to include allision, and perhaps other species of encounters between vessels. The term is not inapplicable to cases where a stationary vessel is struck by one under way, strictly termed “allision;” or where one vessel is brought into contact with another by swinging at D anchor. And even an injury received by a vessel at her moorings, in consequence of being violently rubbed or pressed against by # second vessel lying along-side of her, in consequence of a collision against such second vessel by a third one under way, may be compensated for, under the general head of “collision,” as well as an injury which is the direct result of a “blow,” properly so called. Abb. Adm. 73.

[Lat. collisio, from collidere, to dash together; Fr. abordage.'] A dashing, or violently running together. Usually applied to the running foul of vessels. Sometimes distinguished from a Uision, (q. V.) Jacobsen's Sea Laws, 324. Strykius de Collis. Nav. cited i Ud. 3 Kent's Com. 230, 302, note. Abbott on Ship. part 3, ch. 1.

maritime law. Takes place when two ships or other vessels run foul of each other, or when one runs foul of the other. In such cases there is almost always a loss or damage incurred. There are four possibilities under which an accident of this sort may occur. 1. It may happen without blame being imputable to either party, as when the loss is occasioned by a storm, or any other vis major; in that case the loss must be borne by the party on whom it happens to light, the other not being responsible to him in any degree.—2. Both parties may be to blame, as when there has been a want of due diligence or of skill on both sides; in such cases, the loss must be apportioned between them, as having been occasioned by the fault of both of them.—3. The suffering party may have been the cause of the injury, then he must bear the loss.—4. It may have been the fault of the ship which ran down the other; in this case, the injured party would be entitled to an entire compensation from the other. 2 Dodson's Rep. 83, 85.—5. Another case has been put, namely, when there has been some fault or neglect, in a state of uncertainty. In this case, it does not appear to be settled whether the loss shall be apportioned or borne by the suffering party; Opinions on this subject are divided. Vide generally, Story, Bailm. § 607 to 612; Marsh. Ins. B. 1, c. 12, s. 2; Wesk. Ins. art. Running Foul; Jacobson's Sea Laws, B. 4, c. 13; 4 Taunt. 126; 2 Chit. Pr. 513, 535; Code de Comm. art. 407; Boulay-Paty, Cours de Dr. Commercial, tit. 12, s. 6; Pard. n. 652 to 654; Pothier, Avaries, n. 155; Emerig. Assur. ch. 12, § 14.