Stilk v Myrick (1809)

Facts of the Case of Stilk v Myrick (1809) EWHC KB J58

The case involves a captain of a ship, the crew of the vessel, and the owner of the ship. A ship was on a voyage in the Baltic Ocean. During this time, two of its crew deserted it.

After the event, the captain made a promise to the remaining team that if they dock the ship safely, then they will be given the shares of the deserters. The remaining crew agreed with the captain in the belief that they will get paid more than what they were promised.

By the time the ship docked safely in the port at England, the owner of the vessels had denied the other remaining crews of the compensation. As a result of this, the remaining crews filed a complaint against the shipowner.

The claim was made on the grounds that the captain promised them additional payments. With this on hand, the promise of the captain must be enforced.

Case Issue:

The issue of the case on hand is whether or not the promise or consideration, made by the captain was enforceable to create a legally binding contract.

Case Decision:

The court decided that the promise made by the captain regarding the additional payment to the crew cannot be enforced. The reason behind this decision in Stylk v Myrick (1809) is that past consideration hinders the promise of the captain to be enforceable.

Specifically, past consideration is not good consideration. Moreover, citing valid reasons that it was already the responsibility of the crew to deliver the ship safely to the port of England, with or without the additional payment from the deserters.

Read more about the case here.