Anglo-Canadian Shipping Company Limited, Canadian Occidental Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America

This matter is here upon the petition of the Pacific Coast European Conference and its several shipping lines and ship-owning members, seeking review of an order of the Federal Maritime Commission dated January 18,1962, wherein and whereby the respondent Commission concluded, found and ordered that “agreements between common carriers by water in the export foreign commerce which prohibit brokerage or limit the amount thereof to less than 1%% of freight charges, operate to the detriment of the commerce of the United States, and are contrary to the public interest, in violation of § 15 of the Shipping Act, 1916, as amended.” It was ordered that all conferences of the common carriers by water in the outborne trades in foreign commerce of the United States, including the Pacific Coast European Conference, are “required to conform their brokerage practices to this ruling.”

The order in question was entered in a proceeding instituted by the Commission referred to as Docket No. 831 in which numerous conferences, including the one here petitioning, were made respondents. It was ordered that all conferences, including Pacific Coast European Conference, “shall prior to March 23, 1962,…

On Petitions for Rehearing

The various parties hereto, other than the petitioners, have filed petitions for rehearing which indicate so much misunderstanding of the import of this court’s decision that we deem it appropriate to file this opinion in connection with our action upon these petitions.

The petitions assume that our decision requires the Commission to consider separately the rules of each Conference with respect to the payment of brokerage; and that the Commission was prohibited from issuing an order applicable to all Conferences based on evidence and findings with respect to the forwarding industry generally. 1 There is no basis in the decision of this court for any such assumption as that made by these petitioners. We know of no reason why the Commission could not proceed simultaneously, as it did in this case, against conferences, or against all persons interested in the proceedings, or likely to be affected thereby. We found no fault with the fact that some sixty conferences were named as respondents in the Commission’s proceedings; that circumstance constituted no part of the reasons found by us for our decision.

It is true that we gave particular attention to…

310 F.2d 606 ANGLO-CANADIAN SHIPPING COMPANY LIMITED, Canadian Occidental Shipping Co., Ltd., et al., Petitioners, v. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents. No. 17787. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Aug. 20, 1962, Rehearings Denied Nov. 2, 1962. Graham, James & Rolph, Leonard G. James, and Robert L. Harmon, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioners. Lee Loevinger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Antitrust Division, Richard A. Solomon, Atty., Dept. of Justice, James L. Pimper, Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Mitchell, Deputy Gen. Counsel, and Thomas D. Wilcox, Atty., Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C., for respondents. 1 Gerald H. Ullman, New York City, for intervenor, New York Foreign Freight Forwarders and Brokers Ass'n, Inc. 2 Dorr, Cooper & Hays, San Francisco, Cal., and John Tilney Carpenter, New York City, for intervenor States Marine Lines, Inc. 3 J. Richard Townsend, San Francisco, Cal., for intervenor Pacific Coast Customs and Freight Brokers Ass'n. 4 Herman Goldman and Elkan Turk, New York City, and J. Richard Townsend, San Francisco, Cal., for intervenor Customs Brokers and Forwarders Ass'n of America, Inc. 5 Orrick, Dahlquist,…