Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 100 views

    The Paquete Habana - 175 U.S. 677, 20 S. Ct. 290 (1900)

    Uploaded by

    Alelojo, Nikko
    The Paquete Habana case established that international law is part of US law and must be considered by US courts. The case involved two Spanish fishing vessels that were captured off the coast of Cuba by US naval forces during the Spanish-American war despite having no knowledge of the war or blockade. Under international law, coastal fishing vessels are exempt from capture as prizes of war. The Supreme Court ruled the captures were unlawful and ordered the vessels and cargos be returned to claimants with damages, establishing international law as binding US law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    The Paquete Habana - 175 U.S. 677, 20 S. Ct. 290 (1900)

    Uploaded by

    Alelojo, Nikko
    100 views2 pages
    The Paquete Habana case established that international law is part of US law and must be considered by US courts. The case involved two Spanish fishing vessels that were captured off the coast of Cuba by US naval forces during the Spanish-American war despite having no knowledge of the war or blockade. Under international law, coastal fishing vessels are exempt from capture as prizes of war. The Supreme Court ruled the captures were unlawful and ordered the vessels and cargos be returned to claimants with damages, establishing international law as binding US law.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Paquete Habana case established that international law is part of US law and must be considered by US courts. The case involved two Spanish fishing vessels that were captured off the coast of Cuba by US naval forces during the Spanish-American war despite having no knowledge of the war or blockade. Under international law, coastal fishing vessels are exempt from capture as prizes of war. The Supreme Court ruled the captures were unlawful and ordered the vessels and cargos be returned to claimants with damages, establishing international law as binding US law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    100 views2 pages

    The Paquete Habana - 175 U.S. 677, 20 S. Ct. 290 (1900)

    Uploaded by

    Alelojo, Nikko
    The Paquete Habana case established that international law is part of US law and must be considered by US courts. The case involved two Spanish fishing vessels that were captured off the coast of Cuba by US naval forces during the Spanish-American war despite having no knowledge of the war or blockade. Under international law, coastal fishing vessels are exempt from capture as prizes of war. The Supreme Court ruled the captures were unlawful and ordered the vessels and cargos be returned to claimants with damages, establishing international law as binding US law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    The Paquete Habana - 175 U.S.

    677,
    20 S. Ct. 290 (1900)
    RULE:

    International law is part of American law, and must be ascertained and


    administered by the courts of justice of appropriate jurisdiction, as often as
    questions of right depending upon it are duly presented for their
    determination. For this purpose, where there is no treaty, and no controlling
    executive or legislative act or juricial decision, resort must be had to the
    customs and usages of civilized nations; and, as evidence of these, to the
    works of jurists and commentators, who by years of labor, research and
    experience, have made themselves peculiarly well acquainted with the subjects
    of which they treat. Such works are resorted to by judicial tribunals, not for the
    speculations of their authors concerning what the law ought to be, but for
    trustworthy evidence of what the law really is. 

    FACTS:

    The United States imposed a blockade of Cuba and declared war against
    Spain. While they were out to sea, fishing along the coast of Cuba and near
    Yucatan, two Spanish vessels engaged in fishing off the coast of Cuba were
    captured by blockading squadrons. Until stopped by the blockading squadron,
    the fishing vessels had no knowledge of the existence of the war, or of any
    blockade. They had no arms or ammunition on board, and made no attempt to
    run the blockade after they knew of its existence, nor any resistance at the
    time of the capture. When the vessels returned with their catches of fresh fish,
    they were seized and a libel of condemnation of each vessel as a prize of war
    was filed against the vessel in court. The district court entered a final decree of
    condemnation and public sale at auction. Claimants appealed.

    ISSUE:

    Was it proper for the court to issue a decree of condemnation and auction the
    fishing vessels?

    ANSWER:

    No

    CONCLUSION:
    The Supreme Court ruled that, under the law of nations, in each case the
    capture was unlawful and without probable cause. It was a rule of international
    law that coast fishing vessels, pursuing their vocation of catching and bringing
    in fresh fish, were exempt, with their cargoes and crews, from capture as prize
    of war. Although not reduced to treaty or statutory law, courts were obligated
    to take notice of and give effect to that rule. Thus, the decrees condemning
    the vessels were reversed and, in each case, it was ordered that the proceeds
    of the sales of each vessel and cargo be restored to the respective claimant,
    with compensatory damages and costs. The Court also noted that it had
    appellate jurisdiction over the controversy without regard to the amount in
    dispute and without certification from the district court, as required by prior
    statutory law.

    You might also like