In the case of Isbrandtsen Company, Inc. v. Johnson (1951), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Isbrandtsen Company, a shipping company that had sued over an order by the Federal Maritime Board which allowed its competitor to lower freight rates on certain routes without offering similar reductions to other companies. The court held that such orders violated provisions of the Shipping Act 1916 and were thus unlawful. The decision was based on two main reasons: firstly, it was deemed unfair for one company to be given preferential treatment; secondly, there was no evidence presented showing that allowing only one company to reduce its prices would not harm competition or public interest in general.

In the dissenting opinion for Isbrandtsen Company, Inc. v. Johnson, Justice Robert H. Jackson argued that the majority's decision to allow a shipper to recover damages from a carrier for losses incurred due to negligence was inconsistent with established legal principles and precedent. He contended that under both common law and statutory provisions of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), carriers were not liable for losses resulting from their own negligence unless they had expressly agreed to such liability in their contracts with shippers. In this case, no such agreement existed between Isbrandtsen Company and its carrier; therefore, according to Justice Jackson’s interpretation of COGSA, it should have been immune from liability for any damage caused by its negligent stowage practices.