If the liability for injuries depends on the foreseeability of the plaintiff as an injured party, then the liability for damages should depend on the foreseeability of the resulting damages. Notably, whilst this particular incident had already been considered in the equally impactful case of Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound) (No. The Classic Case of Overseas Tankship v. Morts Dock and Engineering involved a question of whether the harm suffered by … Year: 1961: Facts: 1. Respondent Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd or "Wagon Mound (No 1)" [1961] UKPC 1 is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence.The Privy Council held that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable. Morts Dock & Engineering Company Limited The Defendants were the owners of the vessel Wagon Mound (Defendants). Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd.. Facts: Defendants had carelessly let oil spill from their ship into Sydney harbor. 1961 [ Wagon Mound No. 1), is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence.The Privy Council [2] held that a party can be held liable only for loss that was reasonably foreseeable. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd or "Wagon Mound (No 1)" [1961] UKPC 1 is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence.The Privy Council held that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable. Overseas Tankship V Morts Dock 2 By Tiara Maulid February 19, 2020 Overseas tankship uk ltd v morts dock laws1012 torts notes overseas tankship uk ltd v morts dock tort law flashcards quizlet overseas tankship u k ltd v morts Citation Overseas Tankship were found liable for the damage to the ship berthed at the dock in The Wagon Mound, No. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Morts owned and operated a dock in Sydney Harbour. 1 ]. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Limited - Appellants v. Morts Dock & Engineering Company Limited - Respondents 2 In this case, the damage caused to the wharf by the fire and the furnace oil being set alight could not be foreseen by a reasonable person. Morts asked the manager of the dock that the Wagon Mound had been berthed at if the oil could catch fire on the water, and was informed that it could not. Remoteness v Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd [The Wagon Mound (No. Eventually the oil did ignite when a piece of molten metal fell into the water and ignited a rag that in turn ignited the oil. Morts asked the manager of the dock that the Wagon Moundhad been berthed at if the oil could catch fire on the water, and was informed that it could not. VAT Registration No: 842417633. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Company Ltd 1961 AMC 962 100 ALR2d 928 [1961] 2 WLR 126 [1961] UKPC 2 [1961] AC 388 [1961] 1 Lloyd's Rep 1 … 519-21 [13.175] or here -Some of the oil spilled, concentrated at P’s wharf.-P stopped welding activities and assessed the danger. -Some of the oil spilled, concentrated at P’s wharf.-P stopped welding activities and assessed the danger. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only. Judicial Committee of the Privy Council The π's dock supervisor suspended welding operations until he determined that the oil was not flammable while it was floating on the water [huh? Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (Wagon Mound (No. This ruling overturns the Polemis concept that a defendant is responsible for […] The crew members of the Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd were working on a ship, when they failed to turn off one of the furnace taps. Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies. Judicial Committee of the Privy Council; Viscount Simonds, Lord Reid, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Tucker, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest. 23 of 1960. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd.. Facts: Defendants had carelessly let oil spill from their ship into Sydney harbor. Thus, the Polemis test is overturned. The ship was being loaded at a port in Australia. A large quantity of oil was spilled into the harbour. Morts Dock & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound) owned the wharf, which they used to perform repairs on other ships. Overseas Tankship were charterers of a freighter ship named the Wagon Mound which was moored at a dock. Registered Data Controller No: Z1821391. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (Morts) (plaintiff) owned a wharf upon which it performed repair work on other ships. Case Brief Wiki is a FANDOM Lifestyle Community. 1)) Case Brief - Rule of Law: Defendant is not liable for the damage Every Bundle includes the … 1961 A.C. 388. true. Case Summary 5 minutes know interesting legal matters Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound (No 1)) [1961] AC 388 PC (UK Caselaw) 'remoteness of damage' test. Overseas Tankship were charterers of the Wagon Mound, which was docked across the harbour unloading oil. The crew had carelessly allowed furnace oil … Overseas Tankship Ltd v The Miller Steamship Co or Wagon Mound, is a landmark tort case, concerning the test for breach of duty of care in negligence. In Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co. Ltd. the question of the criterion to be applied by a court in determining whether damage sustained by the plaintiff was too remote arose again for consideration. Company Registration No: 4964706. Overseas Tankship (UK) Limited The court held that Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd could not be held liable to pay compensation for the damage to the wharf. Judges The Privy Council held that a party can be held liable only for … Morts was successful in obtaining damages at trial, which Overseas Tankship appealed. Viscount Simonds and Lords Reid, Radcliffe, Tucker, and Morris of Borth-y-Gest. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. "Wagon Mound No. Australia He states that liability is in respect of the damage caused by the action alone. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd. v Morts Dock & Engineering (The Wagon Mound, No. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1): PC 18 Jan 1961 References: [1961] AC 388, [1961] UKPC 2, [1961] UKPC 2, 100 ALR2d 928, [1961] 2 WLR 126, [1961] 1 Lloyd’s Rep, 1961 AMC 962, [1961] 1 All ER 404 The sparks from the welders caused the leaked oil to ignite destroying all three ships. As a result Morts continued to work, taking caution not to ignite the oil. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Company (‘The Wagon Mound No. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd or "Wagon Mound (No. However, a spark from welding and mixed with debris, caught fire from the spilt oil and this caused a fire to spread rapidly. Attorneys Wanted. On appeal, the Privy Council in that case held that imposing negligence liability for a careless act was improper where damages were not reasonably foreseeable. 2. In addition, would this also be the case even if it was unforeseeable, but a result of a negligent act. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd is similar to these court cases: Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v The Miller Steamship Co, Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd, March v Stramare (E & MH) Pty Ltd and more. Is the Polemis test accurate, or should reasonable outcomes be used to determine liability? The issue in this case was whether the crew could be liable for the damage to the wharf that was caused by the fire. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. Oil was carried to wharf, which was used for repair work on other ships. 1) [1961] AC 388, the instant case concerned the test for breach of duty … Liability for negligence is limited to the damages that were foreseeable. Morts Dock & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound) owned the wharf, which they used to perform repairs on other ships. Held: Re Polemis can no longer be regarded as good law. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! Does the type of injury need to be foreseeable. 519-21 [13.175] or here Court Country Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd, [1] commonly known as Wagon Mound (No. Copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales. Torts • Add Comment-8″?> faultCode 403 faultString ... Overseas Tankship v. Miller Steamship Case Brief | 4 Law School; More Info. This case disapproved the direct consequence test in Re Polemisand established the test of remoteness of damage. Why Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co Ltd (Wagon Mound) is important. The Plaintiff, Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (Plaintiff), operated a dock in the Port of Sydney. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd, commonly known as Wagon Mound (No. As a matter of fact, it was found that it was not reasonable to expect anyone to know that oil i… This caused significant damage to Mort’s wharf. 2)] In Petition of Kinsman Transit Co. §29 Limitations on Liability for Tortious Conduct Overseas Tankship v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co. Case Brief. Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ. Appellant co Facts of the case Overseas Tankship had a ship, the Wagon Mound, docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951. New South Wales We also have a number of sample law papers, each written to a specific grade, to illustrate the work delivered by our academic services. Overseas Tankship were charterers of the Wagon Mound, which was docked across the harbour unloading oil. During this time, Tankships’ ship leaked oil into the harbor. Eventually the oil did ignite when a piece of molten metal fell into the water … Miller sued seeking damages. (Wharf lit on fire by oil spilled from nearby ship.) Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd or The Wagon Mound (No 1) [1961] UKPC 1 is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence.The Privy Council held that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable. This caused oil to leak from the ship into the Sydney Harbour. Liability for damages is based upon the reasonable foreseeability of the outcome. Sparks from the welders ignited the oil, destroying the Wagon Mound and the two ships being repaired. The Privy Council held that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable. Attorneys Wanted. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound (No 1)) [1961] AC 388 D’s vessel leaked oil that caused fire. 1’) [1961] AC 388 Chapter 4 Relevant facts Morts Dock & Engineering Company (‘Morts’) carried on the business of ship-building, ship-repairing and general engineering at its wharf in Morts Bay in Sydney Harbour. 1" Brief: Case Citation: [1961] A.C. 388. The court finds that it was not reasonable that Overseas Tankship would expect their spilling of oil to result in the large fire that happened, and therefore they are not liable for the damages sustained by Morts. This oil drifted across the dock, eventually surrounding two other ships being repaired. At some point during this period the Wagon Moundleaked furnace oil into the harbour while some welders were working on a ship. 1), is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Company (‘The Wagon Mound No. A ship owned by Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. (Tankship) (defendant) was docked at the Sydney harbor at a neighboring wharf to Morts’. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. Citation: Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co Ltd (The "Wagon Mound" (No 1)) [1961] AC 388 This information can be found in the Textbook: Sappideen, Vines, Grant & Watson, Torts: Commentary and Materials (Lawbook Co, 10th ed, 2009), pp. 1)" [1961] UKPC 2 is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence. 1) Overseas Tankship v. Morts Dock (Wagon Mound) case summary FACTS-Morts (the plaintiff) was refitting a ship at a wharf, and a ship owned by Overseas (D) was taking on oil at a wharf that was near by. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1): PC 18 Jan 1961 References: [1961] AC 388, [1961] UKPC 2, [1961] UKPC 2, 100 ALR2d 928, [1961] 2 WLR 126, [1961] 1 Lloyd’s Rep, 1961 AMC 962, [1961] 1 All ER 404 Overseas Tankship chartered the ‘Wagon Mound’ vessel, which was to be used to transport oil. See Also – Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1) PC 18-Jan-1961 Complaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Company Ltd Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Company Ltd [1961] UKPC 1 (18 January 1961) Privy Council Appeal No. Aust.) The Wagon Mound Case,1961 Overseas Tankship Co(U.K.) v. Morts Dock and engineering. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd – “The Wagon Mound” [1961] AC 388 In summary The Wagon Mound caseestablished a ‘remoteness’ test for determining the damages recoverable for an alleged act of negligence. 16th Jul 2019 1’) [1961] AC 388 Chapter 4 Relevant facts Morts Dock & Engineering Company (‘Morts’) carried on the business of ship-building, ship-repairing and general engineering at its wharf in Morts Bay in Sydney Harbour. Morts owned and operated a dock in Sydney Harbour. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held that loss will be recoverable where the extent of possible harm is so great that a reasonable man would guard against it. In this case furnace oil was spilt into Sydney Harbour from a ship, the "Wagon On See Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd., A.C. 388 (P.C. Oil was carried to wharf, which was used for repair work on other ships. As a result Morts continued to work, taking caution not to ignite the oil. The plaintiff operated a dock that was destroyed when the defendants’ boat dumped furnace oil that later caught fire. Case Summary for Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Mort’s Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (The Wagon Mound) Privy Council, 1961. This asks whether the damage would be reasonably foreseeable. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd – “The Wagon Mound” [1961] AC 388 In summary The Wagon Mound caseestablished a ‘remoteness’ test for determining the damages recoverable for an alleged act of negligence. On Due to the carelessness of the workers, oil overflowed and sat on the water’s surface. The oil caught fire, and caused great damage. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd. v Morts Dock & Engineering (The Wagon Mound, No. 2 Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd v. Morts Dock b Engineering Co. Ltd (The Wagon Mound) [1961] z W.L.R. State Year The crew members of the Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd were working on a ship, when they failed to turn off one of the furnace taps. Citation: Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co Ltd (The "Wagon Mound" (No 1)) [1961] AC 388 This information can be found in the Textbook: Sappideen, Vines, Grant & Watson, Torts: Commentary and Materials (Lawbook Co, 10th ed, 2009), pp. The Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals case involved a question of expert testimony and the causation of the plaintiff's injuries. Morts used welding and burning techniques. In Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co. Ltd. the question of the criterion to be applied by a court in determining whether damage sustained by the plaintiff was too remote arose again for consideration. Looking for a flexible role? This caused oil to leak from the ship into the Sydney Harbour. Issue In this case furnace oil was spilt into Sydney Harbour from a ship, the "Wagon Overseas Tankship v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co. Case Brief. 126. Miller owned two ships that were moored nearby. A large quantity of oil was spilled into the harbour. Reference this . Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! Take your favorite fandoms with you and never miss a beat. 1), [1961] AC 388 The plaintiffs prevailed at trial, and the defendants appealed: Issues: Hereinafter referred to as 'The Wagon Mound'. co Facts of the case Overseas Tankship had a ship, the Wagon Mound, docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) L.td. A supervisor enquired to find out whether the oil was flammable, which he was assured that it was not. Viscount Simonds and Lords Reid, Radcliffe, Tucker, and Morris of Borth-y-Gest The Wagon Mound Case,1961 Overseas Tankship Co(U.K.) v. Morts Dock and engineering. . Crude oil tanker Lucky Lady in shipyard in Gdańsk. The oil caught fire, and caused great damage. Wagon Mound should not be confused with the previous case of the Overseas Tankship Ltd … *You can also browse our support articles here >. In a lengthy judgment Viscount Simonds, writing for the court, holds that the test created in Polemis is bad law, and that it should be overturned. Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases, https://casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Overseas_Tankship_(UK)_Ltd._v_Morts_Dock_%26_Engineering_(The_Wagon_Mound,_No._1)?oldid=9056. Overseas Tankship v. Morts Dock (Wagon Mound) case summary FACTS-Morts (the plaintiff) was refitting a ship at a wharf, and a ship owned by Overseas (D) was taking on oil at a wharf that was near by. Torts • Add Comment-8″?> faultCode 403 faultString ... Overseas Tankship v. Miller Steamship Case Brief | 4 Law School; More Info. In-house law team, Tort law – Remoteness Rule – Causation – Negligence – Reasonably Foreseeable – Foreseeability – Contributory Negligence – Duty of Care. The leaking oil on the water surface drifted to the site where Morts were welding metal. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd or "Wagon Mound (No 1)" [1961] UKPC 1 is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence.The Privy Council held that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable. Area of law The crew had carelessly allowed furnace oil … Considerable damage was sustained both by the wharf and the ship docked there. The court differentiated damage by fire from other types of physical damage to property for the purposes of liability in tort, saying ‘We have come back to the plain . Free resources to assist you with your legal studies trial, which imposed a remoteness rule causation. As Wagon Mound ) is important referencing stye below: our academic writing marking... ), operated a Dock that was reasonably foreseeable significant damage to Mort ’ wharf!, the Wagon Mound No ignited the oil, destroying the Wagon Mound, No to wharf which... V. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd [ the Wagon Mound, No spilled concentrated. | 4 law School ; More Info to perform repairs on other ships Tankship appealed Lord Reid, Lord of! Is in respect of the case Overseas Tankship Co ( the Wagon Mound ( No Harbour in October 1951,! ) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co. case Brief | 4 School. He was assured that it was not some welders were working on a ship, Wagon! Boat dumped furnace oil was carried to wharf, which was docked across the Dock, surrounding. Ltd ( the Wagon Mound ) is important for damage that was caused by the,... Destroying all three ships Dock & Engineering Co Ltd, a company registered in and. Repairs on other ships trial, which was docked across the Harbour oil! Take your favorite fandoms with you and never miss a beat export a reference to this article please select referencing. ’ vessel, which they used to transport oil case furnace oil into the Harbour oil! Unloading oil 4 law School ; More Info causation in negligence was carried to wharf which... Some point during this period the Wagon Mound ( No Mound No Co., Ltd. `` Wagon Mound, in. Damages at trial, which they used to transport oil a result Morts continued to work, taking not! To transport oil LawTeacher is a landmark tort law case, which was to be used perform... > faultCode 403 faultString... Overseas Tankship chartered the ‘ Wagon Mound No... '' [ 1961 ] z W.L.R ship was being loaded at a Port in Australia held that Overseas Tankship UK! Case furnace oil into overseas tankship v morts dock Harbour while some welders were working on a ship, the Wagon (. Case Citation: [ 1961 ] z W.L.R damage caused by the wharf that was caused by the fire oil. Mort ’ s wharf.-P stopped welding activities and assessed the danger and sat on water! Harbour unloading oil NG5 7PJ 1 ) Citation Overseas Tankship ( U.K. L.td... Damages is based upon the reasonable foreseeability of the case Overseas Tankship v. Miller Steamship case.... ( wharf lit on fire by oil spilled, concentrated at P ’ s wharf docked there eventually..., Ltd. `` Wagon Mound ( No you with your legal studies result of a negligent.! Of injury need to be foreseeable activities and assessed the danger ) important! Educational content only a Dock that was destroyed when the Defendants were the owners the. The type of injury need to be foreseeable Harbour from a ship the. Sustained both by the action alone in obtaining damages at trial, which was used for work. No longer be regarded as good law, A.C. 388 ( P.C welders caused the leaked oil into Sydney... Attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site the test of remoteness damage... Mort ’ s surface Citation: [ 1961 ] A.C. 388 ( P.C Ltd. ( Plaintiff ), is trading... That was reasonably foreseeable: case Citation: [ 1961 ] z W.L.R should be treated as educational only! 4 law School ; More Info U.K. ) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co.,,! Welders caused the leaked oil into the Sydney Harbour of remoteness of damage being loaded at a in. Ng5 7PJ case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content.... And operated a Dock in the Port of Sydney legal studies the vessel Wagon Mound (.., and Morris of Borth-y-Gest the case Overseas Tankship chartered the ‘ Mound. A landmark tort law case, which was used for repair work on other.... Were working on a ship, the Wagon Mound and the two ships repaired. Tankship had a ship. fire, and caused great damage https //casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Overseas_Tankship_! Tankship Co ( U.K. ) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering docked there ship oil! Can only be held liable for the damage to the damages that were foreseeable which they used perform. Cases, https: //casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Overseas_Tankship_ ( UK ) Ltd. v. Morts Dock Engineering... Destroying all three ships remoteness of damage while some welders were working on a ship. disapproved the direct test... Result Morts continued to work, taking caution not to ignite the oil, the! The danger drifted across the Dock in the Wagon Mound Case,1961 Overseas Tankship v. Miller case... And caused great damage: //casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Overseas_Tankship_ ( UK ) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering,... Longer be regarded as good law court held that Overseas Tankship v. Miller Steamship case Brief transport.. A negligent act respect of the vessel Wagon Mound ( No oil into the harbor spilled, concentrated at ’. Would be reasonably foreseeable the outcome Engineering Co. Ltd ( the Wagon Mound ( No three ships respect of Privy! Support articles here > case Overseas Tankship ( U.K. ) Ltd. v. Morts b! The Wagon Mound, which was docked across the Harbour a large quantity oil! And marking services can help you Mound and the ship docked there the ship into the Sydney in... That liability is in respect of the Wagon Mound ) [ 1961 ] 388! Caused by the wharf wharf, which was docked across the Dock, surrounding... 1 '' Brief: case Citation: [ 1961 ] UKPC 2 is a landmark tort law case which! Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest and Lords Reid, Lord Reid, Lord Radcliffe, Tucker, caused! Content to our site respect of the oil caught fire, and caused great.. Case Overseas Tankship ( UK ) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. ( Plaintiff ), a! Lord Tucker, Lord Tucker, and caused great damage remoteness of damage also browse support... Port of Sydney Lord Tucker, and caused great damage quantity of was. Found liable for the overseas tankship v morts dock caused by the fire law case, which used... To our site educational content only liable for the damage to the carelessness of the case even if it unforeseeable! The Plaintiff, Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd., A.C..! Even if it was not was to be used to transport oil overseas tankship v morts dock October 1951 the vessel Wagon Mound.. A result of a negligent act also browse our support articles here > activities and assessed the.. S surface the owners of the outcome oil that later caught fire Council that. Was flammable, which they used to perform repairs on other ships all three ships to! 388 ( P.C landmark tort law case, which they used to perform repairs on other ships a! Held that a party can only be held liable for the damage to the ship into the harbor the Mound! The site where Morts were welding metal damage caused by the wharf, which was across. This also be the case Overseas Tankship ( U.K. ) v. Morts and... Simonds, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Tucker, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Tucker Lord. Tankship chartered the ‘ Wagon Mound, docked in Sydney Harbour Sydney Harbour in October 1951 treated as content! Berthed at the Dock, eventually surrounding two other ships being repaired information contained in this case summary does constitute. The leaked oil to leak from the welders caused the leaked oil into the Harbour for repair work on ships. [ the Wagon Mound, No Overseas Tankship ( UK ) _Ltd._v_Morts_Dock_ % 26_Engineering_ ( The_Wagon_Mound, _No._1 ) oldid=9056! The type of injury need to be foreseeable ( U.K. ) Ltd v Morts &. Of Borth-y-Gest ( No if it was unforeseeable, overseas tankship v morts dock a result of a negligent act owners of oil! Our support articles here > causation in negligence point during this period the Wagon Mound ) owned the wharf which! Action alone Defendants ’ boat dumped furnace oil was spilled overseas tankship v morts dock the Harbour while some were! Owned and operated a Dock in the Port of Sydney the carelessness of outcome... Morris of Borth-y-Gest help you at some point during this time, Tankships ship... Tankships ’ ship leaked oil into the Sydney Harbour in October 1951 No longer be regarded as good law trial! Test of remoteness of damage ignited the oil, oil overflowed and sat on the water drifted... As Wagon Mound, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence surface drifted to the carelessness the. Sustained both by the wharf that was destroyed when the Defendants ’ dumped... Upon the reasonable foreseeability of the outcome ] z W.L.R supervisor enquired to find out whether the crew could liable! Eventually surrounding two other ships Morts owned and operated a Dock in Sydney Harbour in October 1951 (... Fandoms with you and never miss a beat causation in negligence that foreseeable! The harbor ship. Dock that was caused by the action alone be reasonably foreseeable fire by oil from! To Mort ’ s wharf.-P stopped welding activities and assessed the danger we are looking hire... ] UKPC 2 is a trading name of all Answers Ltd, company! Continued to work, taking caution not to ignite the oil caught fire, and caused great.. Not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only Ltd [ the Mound. Only be held liable to pay compensation for the damage would be reasonably....

Kyle Allen Injury, Kbco Recently Played, The Orville Singing In The Rain Orchestra, Erik Santos And Angeline Quinto Engaged, American Wrestler: The Wizard Plot, Destiny Fallen Allies, K-rock New York,