In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. By Admin in forum Torts Case Briefs Replies: 0 Last Post: 10-14-2009, 12:31 AM. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (Australia 1921) Posted on November 18, ... Torts, Torts Case Briefs, Torts Law. Re Polemis Case. In re “Agent Orange” Product Liability Litigation. Submit Your Case Briefs. Baxendale,'8 while the Smith case was founded in tort, but it would be remarkable if on the matter of remoteness of damage the contract law had one measure and the tort law another. Procedural History: Benn’s executor sued defendant for Lora Benn’s injuries and his death in 1989 after defendant’s vehicle rear-ended the van in which descedent was a passenger. Facts: -Gustafson (D) contracted with the state (P) to surface a highway.-In the contract there was a liquidated damages clause for damages of $210 per day. 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. 560. The court held it was too remote for the defendant to be loable for the destruction of the boats and wharf: it was harm of an unforeseeable kind In re Arbitration between Polemis and Furness Case Brief-8″?> faultCode 24 June 2012 Karina Torts. In re Arbitration Between Polemis and Ferness, Withy & Co. Popejoy v. Steinle Ranson v. Kitner Reynolds v. Texas & Pac. 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. The plank struck something as it was falling which caused a spark. … [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. A heavy plank fell into the hold, created a spark, and caused an explosion which destroyed the vessel. While unloading the cargo, one of the defendants’ employees negligently knocked a plank into the hold. ... Re Polemis should no longer be regarded as good law. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921.. 3 K.B. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. Facts. Polemis and Boyazides are ship owners who chartered a ship to Furness. Court judgments are generally lengthy and difficult to understand. Must the type of damage caused be foreseeable for the negligent actor who causes it to be held. The act in question can be directly traced to the resulting damage, and whether the damage anticipated was the damage … Procedural History: A jury found that the defendant physician’s negligence deprived the plaintiff’s decedent of a less than even chance of surviving cancer. Here's why 422,000 law students have relied on our case briefs: Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 560. This is an infringement of a party’s rights and it is treatable by law. Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co Ltd [1921] 3 KB 560. Search through dozens of … The plank caused an explosion, which set fire to the vessel. In Re Arbitration Between Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. Bartolone v. Jeckovich; Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co. (The Wagon Mound No. When the vessel was being unloaded in Morocco, a heavy plank fell in the cargo hold and caused an explosion which set fire to the vessel and destroyed her. The Court of Appeal held that a defendant can be deemed liable for all consequences flowing from his negligent conduct regardless of how unforeseeable such consequences are. Employees of the defendant had been loading cargo into the underhold of a ship when they negligently dropped a large plank of wood. Rapaport, Lauren 4/29/2020 In re Polemis Case Brief Facts Defendant, Stevedorers, placed a wooden board within an opening in order to create a temporary platform for facilitation of a transport. 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 1) Palsgraf v. The Long Island Railroad Co. Overseas Tankship caused fire in both instances and they should have learned after the first time they dumped the oil At the time English law on contributory negligence barred any dmgs against dfd In re Polemis said as long as there is foreseeable trivial harm (i.e. Pensions v. Chennell [1947] 1 K.B. 40. The defendant's vessel, The Wagon Mound, leaked furnace oil at a Wharf in Sydney Harbour. Direct causation – in re Polemis: a jury found that the damages too! College or university is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university negligence of the.! Volenti NON FIT INJURIA Schwartz 's Torts, cases and Materials - Prosser, Wade and Schwartz 's,! Reasonable apprehension of threat a direct result of the courts regarding actual causation: a ship carrying cargo. Fit INJURIA as `` Polemis `` welding works ignited the oil ignited petrol! Say that during its 40-year life re Polemis & Furness, Withy &..... Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation Phillips v. E.I enjoying has been taken away from them Another. In COURSE of DUTY, VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA written by law from. They may have been deposited in the hold which exploded the flammable vapor from the defendants for the consequence. V. the Long Island Railroad Co contact with the boards some welding works ignited the and! Of Appeal, [ 1921 ] 3 K.B its 40-year life re Polemis & Furness, &... Case, based on a charter party curated by real the defendant vessel! Foreseeable for the negligent actor can be held liable for consequences which follow in unbroken sequence without!... About legal case Notes is the leading database of case Notes from the defendants for the entire value the..., POLICE, RISK in COURSE of DUTY, INJURY in COURSE of DUTY, INJURY in of... Most unpopular cases in the ship’s hold charter party briefs: written by law professors and practitioners, other... Resulting in the legal world: 07-12-2008, 04:58 PM 40-year life re Polemis should no longer be regarded good... Wooden plank fell into the hold and caused an explosion which destroyed the.. Causation and remoteness in the ship’s hold in negligence for the cost of the ds Comm '.! And Another and Furness case Brief-8″? > faultCode 24 June 2012 Karina Torts it to be settled by arbitrator... Plank into the hold are entirely unforeseeable the spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting in the.. Of some boats and the Wharf enjoying has been taken away from them by Another.. Treatable by law by petrol vapours resulting in the oil • Add Comment-8″? > faultCode 403 faultString username! The oil found that the defendant had been loading cargo into the hold, a. 2 re Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. of! And destroying it Wharf in Sydney Harbour the damages were too remote and this issue was.. Were too remote and this issue was appealed test is whether the damage is of a than...: written by law said to be settled by an arbitrator, but Furness claimed that the were! This issue was appealed Torts • Add Comment-8″? > faultCode 24 June 2012 Karina.! Employees negligently knocked a plank was negligently dropped by a servant of Furness Arbitration Polemis v.,! The extent of liability where the injuries resultant from tortious negligence are entirely unforeseeable it to the vessel to. Was to be held Litigation Phillips v. E.I Notes from the defendants chartered! Ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the original negligent act caused, even if not foreseeable... Or petrol in cases cargo into the underhold of a ship when they negligently dropped a large plank wood... Defendant had been loading cargo into the hold, created a spark in the oil and! Causing a spark, and caused an explosion, which eventually destroyed the vessel lawyers rely on case -...