CO129-541-1 Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 29-7-1932 - 3-2-1933 — Page 70

seems, doubted whether this was piracy.

It was

however decided to be sufficiently ejusdem generis for the purpose of the risks clause of a policy of insurance. Likewise in Kleinwort v. Shepherd (1859,

1 El & El. 447) the court appears to have contemplated that pirates were persons who not only murdered the

captain but also ran off with the vessel. In He Tivnan also (supra note 4) there was a seizure of the vessel, though here there is nothing to indicate that the

court necessarily regarded this as an essential

ingredient of the offence of piracy jure gentium.

In

point of fact no single case of piracy jure gentium has

ever, so far as the writers are aware, come before the

courts in England in which there had not been a

completed robbery of some sort, and this fact is

significant, though not of course necessarily con-

clusive.

7.

The conclusion to be drawn from the decided

08808, appears to be, to put matter at ita lowest,

that it is at least dubious whether, sacording to English law 80 far as contained in the decided cases, an offence committed on the high seas is piracy jure gentium unless there is some actual robbery. This conclusion does not seem to be in any way negatived by

the position as revealed by the various atatutes on

piracy and kindred offences. These statutes are

sufficiently fully considered in the Judgment of the

Hong Kong Court in the present oase and need not be

discussed here.

71

Page 70Page 71