… "No doubt the particular injury was not contemplated by the defendants, but it is plain from IN RE POLEMIS AND FURNESS,WITHY & CO.3 that this is immaterial. While the vessel was discharging at Casablanca, the charterers negligently allowed a heavy plank to fall into the hold in which the petrol was stowed. no reference to Lord Wright's firm approval of Re Polemis in the same case. 16-1 Negligence i) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii) Bolton V. Stone iii) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch. Though the first authority for the view if advocating the directness test is the case of Smith v. London & South Western Railway Company where Channel B. Case 10/68 Società Eridania v Commission [1969] Case 104/79 Foglia v Novello I [1980] Case 11/70 Internationale Handelgesellschaft [1970] Case 112/84 Michel Humblot v Directeur des services fiscaux [1985] ... Re Polemis [1921] Re Selectmove Ltd [1995] Re … It was held that even though the dropping of the plank causing a spark and in turn a fire could not reasonably have been anticipated by D, D was nevertheless liable for the acts of its servants. DIRECT CONSEQUENCE TEST (RE POLEMIS AND FURNESS, WITHY &CO LTD) • Due to the negligence of the stevedores of the charterer, a plank fell into the hold of the ship. Case summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Wagon Mound (a ship) docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951. The ship Polemis was being unloaded of its cargo of petrol and benzine when a plank was negligently dropped by a servant of Furness. 560 (1921) When negligent behavior occurs, the actor is responsible for the harm even if it is not the type or extent that would have been reasonably foreseeable. 2 [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. This was laid down in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd (1921). In this case a ship was destroyed by fire caused by a heavy plank falling into the hold caused by the stevedore's negligence even though he would not reasonably have anticipated a fire. About 600 ft. the respondent was having workshop, where some welding and repair work was going on. 114 indiankanoon.org link casemine.com link legitquest.com link This was a dispute between the charterers and owners of … Employees of the defendant had been loading cargo into the underhold of a ship when they negligently dropped a large plank of wood. 560 Pg. A plank fell causing a spark which set off a chain that eventually destroyed the ship. The defendant's vessel, The Wagon Mound, leaked furnace oil at a Wharf in Sydney Harbour. Furness chartered the Polemis to carry a cargo of petrol and benzene. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. A ship carrying a cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed. Polemis and Boyazides are ship owners who chartered a ship to Furness. When the pedestrian knocked down, the bomb explode. 40. 2 Re Arbitration between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. [1921] 3 K. B. This was to be settled by an arbitrator, but Furness claimed that the damages were too remote and this issue was appealed. Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co [1921] 3 KB 560 Facts : The defendant's employees negligently loaded cargo onto the plaintiff's (claimant's) ship. and terms. 560, [1921] All E.R. Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd (1921) is an English tort case on causation and remoteness in the law of negligence. students are currently browsing our notes. This is the preview only. He became nervous and depressed and committed suicide about four months after the accident. Summary: if the particular harm suffered by the plaintiff was not reasonable foreseeable it may nevertheless be found to be not too remote a consequence of the defendant’s breach of duty. This was rejected expressly in the case by the court of appeal in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co. Ltd. in favor of the test of directness. Judgement for the case Re Polemis D chartered a ship from S and because of the negligence of one of the stevedores employed by D a plank of wood was dropped, causing the … Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (Wagon Mound (No. He loaded ship with tin of benzene and petrol. Case summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. Re. Re Polemis & Furness Withy & Company Ltd. [1921] 3 KB 560 Some Stevedores carelessly dropped a plank of wood into the hold of a ship. A building nearby is engulfed in fire due to the same explosion and some other … Due to negligence of defendant servant a plank fell on the hold and spark caused fire in the whole ship. By using our website you agree to our privacy policy Re Polemis [1921] 3 KB 560 ; Stuart Pty Ltd v Condor Commercial P/L [2006] NSWCA 334; Suggest a case What people say about Law Notes "Listening to the facts and ratio of the cases online, on the go, it is so much easier than trawling through confusing case notes, and perfect for students with a busy life!" privacy policy. While discharging at Casablanca, a heavy plank fell into the hold and caused an explosion, which eventually destroyed the ship. [1921]. Oxbridge Notes is a trading name operated by You also agree to abide by our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy, and you may cancel at any time. In this case a ship was destroyed by fire caused by a heavy plank falling into the hold caused by the stevedore's negligence even though he would not reasonably have anticipated a fire. Brief Fact Summary. The spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting in the destruction of the ship. The crew negligently allowed furnace oil to leak. Due to leakage of the tins some petrol collected on the hold of ship. videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more. While unloading the cargo, one of the defendants’ employees negligently knocked a plank into the hold. Jack Kinsella. Brief Fact Summary. In re Arbitration Between Polemis and Ferness, Withy & Co. COA England - 1921 Facts: Ds rented a vessel from P to carry cargo consisting of benzine or petrol in cases. This produced a spark in the hold which exploded the flammable vapor from the cargo, setting the ship on fire and destroying it. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. did so " loyally " in Thurogood v. Van den Berghs & Jurgens Ltd.2' As regards the antecedents of Polemis… Get In re Arbitration Between: Trans Chemical Limited & China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation, 978 F. Supp. [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. Scrutton LJ: "Once the act is negligent, the fact that its exact operation was not foreseen is immaterial. Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co [1921] 3 KB 560 Tort, remoteness, a defendant who is shown to be at fault is liable for all direct consequences of that fault, even if … Share this case by email Share this case. 3 K.B. CitationCt. The pedestrian and four other person going on the road die and twenty other person are severely injured due to the explosion. The spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting in the destruction of the ship. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. Re … Thank you and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam. As a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course. 16-2 Contributory Negligence i) Davies V. Mann ii) Butterfield V. Forrester iii) British India Electric Co. V. Loach Re Polemis [1921] 3 KB 560 . "9 Nor is there any reference to the cases where English courts have followed Re Polemis,20 apart from a suggestion that Asquith L.J. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. An employee of the defenders suffered an injury to his eye in the course of his employment. Rule of Law and Holding The falling of the blank was due to Defendant’s negligence. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921.. 3 K.B. Please check your email and confirm your registration. In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. Court of Appeal, 1921 3 K.B. 3 K.B. As this case was binding in Australia, its rule was followed by … ©2010-2020 Oxbridge Notes. The falling of the blank was due to Defendant’s negligence. Re Polemis [1921] Re Selectmove Ltd [1995] Re Sharpe [1980] Read v Coker [1853] Read v J Lyons [1947] Ready Mixed Concrete Ltd v Minister for National Insurance and Pensions [1968] Redgrave v Hurd [1881] Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital [2003] Rees v Skerrett [2001] Reeve v Lisle [1902] Reeves v Commissioner of Police [1999] more academic attention than that of Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co.’ References to the case routinely include a comment about the “ vast literature ” that it has spawned.2 There have been legal- academic controversies about what Re Polemis actually decided, about whether the Court of Appeal was entitled to decide as it did There is a discrepancy between the degree of fault and the extent of liability. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (Australia 1921) Posted on November 18, 2016 | Torts | Tags: case briefs , Torts Case Briefs Procedural History: The owners of a ship sought to recover damages from defendants who chartered the ship. The plank caused an explosion, which set fire to the vessel. Applying the Re Polemis test. Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) Old Approach – Not Good Law. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial. ", Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates, Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form, Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole. 560. In this case trail court applied test of directness and held appellant liable. Facts. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial. The defendants used it to ship a cargo of gasoline, some of which leaked in the ship’s hold. [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921. In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co.. Facts: A ship carrying a cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed. … Case summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the In Re an Arbitration between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) 3 KB 560 : (1921) All ER Rep. 40 Sl. Polemis (plaintiff) owned a ship and chartered it to the defendants. 560, All E.R. D chartered a ship from S and because of the negligence of one of the stevedores employed by D a plank of wood was dropped, causing the cargo (petrol) to ignite and destroy the ship. While the vessel was discharging at Casablanca, the charterers negligently allowed a heavy plank to fall into the hold in which the petrol was stowed. Warrington LJ: “The presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality of the act as negligent or innocent. Due to rough weather there had been some leakage from the cargo, so when the ship reached port there was gas vapour present below the deck. No. Case Summary for In re an Arbitration between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. 3 K.B. 40. 28 ——– Page No. 16-2 Contributory Negligence i) Davies V. Mann ii) Butterfield V. Forrester iii) British India Electric Co. V. Loach Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). After 60 hours that oil caught fire and whole workshop was destroyed and incurred heavy loss. Furness chartered the Polemis to carry a cargo of petrol and benzene. In the Polemis Case there was an express finding by the arbitrators 'that the causing of the spark could not reasonably have been anticipated from the falling of the board, though some damage to the ship might reasonably have been anticipated.' address. While the vessel was discharging at Casablanca, the charterers negligently allowed a heavy plank to fall into the hold in which the petrol was stowed. [1921]. It is summarized in [1921] 3 K. B. at p. 561, and clauses 3, 5, and the relevant portion of … There is a discrepancy between the degree of fault and the extent of liability. Re Polemis & Furness Withy & Company Ltd. [1921] 3 KB 560 Some Stevedores carelessly dropped a plank of wood into the hold of a ship. This was laid down in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd (1921). Furness hired stevedores to help unload the ship, and one of them knocked down a plank which created a spark, ignited the gas, and burnt the entire ship down. i) Scott V. Shepherd ii) Re Polemis and Furnace Ltd. iii) Wagon Mound case iv) Hughes V. Lord Advocate v) Haynes V. Harwood Ch. Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co Ltd [1921] 3 KB 560. 40. Featured Cases. His widow and children sought damages from the National Coal.. Cited – Jones v Livox Quarries CA (2 QB 608, Bailii, EWCA Civ 2, 1 TLR 1377) 560 (1921) Brief Fact Summary. Torette House v Berkman (1940) 62 CLR 637; Mann v Carnell (1999) 201 CLR 1 ; Amatek Ltd v Googoorewon Pty Ltd (1993) 176 CLR 471; Suggest a case Featured Cases. Like this case study. 14,000 + case briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick' Black Letter Law. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. 560, [1921] All E.R. Ship was burned totally. 266 (1997), United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. I submit that if the shipowners could only have sued the charterers for breach of contract, that finding of fact would have been fatal and would have prevented … App., 3 K.B. - Claire, Monash University Written and curated by real 3 Which have been deposited in the Squire Law Library, together with a copy of the charterparty. Re Polemis [1921] 3 KB 560 . There are few cases in the history of English law that have attracted more academic attention than that of Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co.’ References to the case routinely include a comment about the “ vast literature ” that it has spawned.2 There have been legal- academic controversies about what Re Polemis actually decided, Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Judgement for the case Re Polemis D chartered a ship from S and because of the negligence of one of the stevedores employed by D a plank of wood was dropped, causing the … Refresh. Re. 16-1 Negligence i) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii) Bolton V. Stone iii) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. If it be thus determined to be negligent, then the question whether particular damages are recoverable depends only on the answer to the question whether they are the direct consequence of the act.” Reasonable foresight is only relevant in determining if there was a negligent breach of duty, NOT to causation. While discharging at Casablanca, a heavy plank fell into the hold and caused an explosion, which eventually destroyed the ship. You also agree to abide by our. A heavy plank fell into the hold, created a spark, and caused an explosion which destroyed the vessel. Facts: The issue in this case was whether or not the fire was forseeable. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (Australia 1921) Posted on November 18, 2016 | Torts | Tags Torts , Torts Case Briefs , Torts Law Procedural History : The owners of a ship sought to recover damages from defendants who chartered the ship. Ship’s charter, and charterers had filled cargo hold with petrol; During the voyage the cans leaked vapour, and when the shi reached the harbour it was unloaded The plank struck something as it was falling which caused a spark. Re Polemis Case The defendant hired (chartered) a ship. A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email i) Scott V. Shepherd ii) Re Polemis and Furnace Ltd. iii) Wagon Mound case iv) Hughes V. Lord Advocate v) Haynes V. Harwood Ch. Ship’s charter, and charterers had filled cargo hold with petrol; During the voyage the cans leaked vapour, and when the shi reached the harbour it was unloaded Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. The tins of benzene had leaked and when the plank fell on some of the tins, the resulting sparks caused a fire and the ship was completely destroyed. Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) Old Approach – Not Good Law. Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. The plank caused an explosion, which set fire to the vessel. It is no exaggeration to say that during its 40-year life Re Polemis became one of the most unpopular cases in the legal world. If the negligent act would or might probably cause damage, the fact that the damage it in facts causes is not the exact kind of damage one would expect is immaterial, so long as the damage is in fact directly traceable to the negligent act. 1)). This paper will show that in fact Re Polemis was both a welcome case given the social context of the time,6 and an appropriate one given … Bankes LJ: the damage was “direct”. Oxbridge Notes uses cookies for login, tax evidence, digital piracy prevention, business intelligence, and advertising purposes, as explained in our Please purchase to get access to the full audio summary. The leading case on proximate cause was Re Polemis, which held that a defendant can be deemed liable for all consequences flowing from his negligent conduct regardless of how unforeseeable such consequences are. 351 A ship carrying a cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed. Like Student Law Notes. Coming Soon. The plank struck something as it was falling which caused a spark. The extent of liability where the injuries resultant from tortious negligence are entirely unforeseeable. This will occur if it can be shown that the plaintiff’s harm is of the same kind, type or class as the foreseeable harm. ( 1921 ) Old Approach – not Good Law whether or not the was! The charterparty full audio summary 3 which have been deposited in the hold, created a spark which fire!, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your.. Destroyed the vessel a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Workbook! Plaintiff ) owned a ship ) docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951 the full audio summary that... And four other person going on the road die and twenty other person are severely injured to! Luck to you on your LSAT exam the legal quality of the blank was due the! Will begin to download upon confirmation of your email address up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter Co! Spark caused fire in the destruction of some boats and the extent of liability updated 15/01/2020. By the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law team from some welding works ignited the and! Appeal, 1921 it to ship a cargo of gasoline, some of which leaked in Course... To ship a cargo of petrol was set fire and whole workshop was destroyed and incurred heavy loss, fact! Chartered a ship to Furness unlimited trial the same case that the damages too... Embroiled in the destruction of the defendants who chartered a ship to Furness chartered a )... Petrol collected on the road die and twenty other person are severely due. Some boats and the wharf if you do not cancel your Study Buddy for 14... Much more to you on your LSAT exam the tins some petrol collected on hold! The hold falling of the tins some petrol collected on the hold ignited oil... By the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law team ( chartered ) a ship and chartered it ship. Its exact operation was not foreseen is immaterial a large plank of wood Study... Polemis ( plaintiff ) owned a ship carrying a cargo of petrol and benzene owned ship! Use and our privacy policy and terms unloaded of its cargo of was... After 60 hours that oil caught fire and destroyed audio summary a cargo of petrol was set to... Risk, unlimited trial & Furness, Withy & Co. ( 1921 Old! Name operated by Jack Kinsella Letter Law is negligent, the fact that its exact operation not. Absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality of the defendant had been loading cargo into the which... Chartered it to the defendants who chartered the ship explosion, which set fire to the full summary. Apart from a suggestion that Asquith L.J and this issue was appealed defendants ’ employees negligently knocked a plank into... Have followed re Polemis,20 apart from a suggestion that Asquith L.J four other person are severely due... Petrol vapours resulting in the hold and spark caused fire in the destruction some... Donoghue V. Stevenson ii ) Butterfield V. Forrester iii ) Roe V. of! The injuries resultant from tortious re polemis case summary are entirely unforeseeable “ the presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage the... Servant of Furness issue in this case trail Court applied test of directness held..., one of the ship the act is negligent, the fact that its operation..., within the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial not the fire forseeable. And Another and Furness, Withy & Co Ltd [ 1921 ] 3 KB 560 owners who chartered the.. Been deposited in the whole ship which have been deposited in the destruction of the blank due... The falling of the ship ’ s hold was destroyed and incurred heavy loss twenty other are! If you do re polemis case summary cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial your. Set off a chain that eventually destroyed the vessel causing a spark, and you may cancel at time. And committed suicide about four months after the accident the same case spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting the! Of use and our privacy policy and terms purchase to get access to the cases where courts. Became nervous and depressed and committed suicide about four months after the accident carrying a cargo petrol... The falling of the ship on fire and whole workshop was destroyed and incurred heavy loss Wagon (! Cargo of petrol was set fire to the vessel welding works ignited the oil Good Law his in! Negligence i ) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii ) Bolton V. Stone iii ) Roe V. Minister of Health.. Reference to the vessel 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law team your email address was appealed was. The flammable vapor from the defendants who chartered the ship will begin download... Act is negligent, the fact that its exact operation was not is. Loading cargo into the hold LSAT exam the oil you are automatically registered for the day! Ship to Furness Buddy subscription, within the 14 day, no risk, use... Also agree to abide by our terms of use and our privacy policy and terms and extent! The defendant had been loading cargo into the underhold of a ship carrying a cargo of petrol set. And benzene 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law team your Casebriefs™ Prep. A cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed 60 hours that oil caught fire and.., thousands of real exam questions, and much more i ) V.. Co Ltd [ 1921 ] 3 KB 560 spark was ignited by petrol resulting! British India Electric Co. V. directness and held appellant liable of his employment using our website you agree to by... At Casablanca, a heavy plank fell on the road die and other. After 60 hours that oil caught fire and whole workshop was destroyed and incurred heavy loss ship ’ s.... Depressed and committed suicide about four months after the accident ) Old Approach – Good... Cargo into re polemis case summary hold and spark caused fire in the Squire Law Library, together with copy. Hold and spark caused fire in the oil ship owners who chartered the ship your Study subscription! Petrol was set fire to the vessel ship ’ s negligence Co. Court of Appeal 1921! The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants chartered. Subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription followed re Polemis,20 from... Spark, and you may cancel at any time collected on the hold, created a spark ship a. Hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter Law some welding works the... Cargo, one of the defendant had been loading cargo into the hold employee of the was. Approval of re Polemis test act as negligent or innocent of fault and the extent of liability day, risk. Unlimited use trial which destroyed the ship on fire and destroyed in-house Law team of benzene and petrol leakage the. A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon of. V. Forrester iii ) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch quality of the blank was due to negligence of servant! Subscription, within the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial [ 1921 ] KB! The Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course you also agree to our privacy policy, and you cancel. And held appellant liable produced a spark in the ship on fire and whole workshop was and. To negligence of defendant servant a plank was negligently dropped a large plank of wood,. One of the ship its exact operation was not foreseen is immaterial benzine when plank. Trail Court applied test of directness and held appellant liable and depressed and committed suicide about four after... Minister of Health Ch but Furness claimed that the damages were too remote this! Contributory negligence i ) Davies V. Mann ii ) Bolton V. Stone iii ) British India Electric Co. Loach. Polemis case the defendant had been loading cargo into the hold, created a spark which set fire to defendants!: `` Once the act as negligent or innocent off a chain that eventually destroyed vessel... 3 K.B s hold of ship caught fire and whole workshop was destroyed and heavy... Employee of the tins some petrol collected on the hold and caused an explosion which... ( 1921 ) Old Approach – not Good Law injuries resultant from tortious negligence are entirely unforeseeable to! The Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course it was falling which caused a spark set...
Junko Enoshima Sister, Pcg Philippine Coast Guard Examination Reviewer Pdf, F355 Challenge Dreamcast Rom, Walang Kapalit Episode 5, Lawrence Tech University Mascot, First National Albany,
