magnitude of damages flowing therefrom. 1966. During this time, Tankships’ ship leaked oil into the harbor. The issue in this case was whether the crew could be liable for the damage to the wharf that was caused by the fire. 1, Polemis would have gone the other way. Will There Ever Be An Online LSAT? A large quantity of oil was spilled into the harbour. Mort’s (P) wharf was damaged by fire due to negligence. Here's why 423,000 law students have relied on our case briefs: Are you a current student of ? August 8, 2013. 3. The defendants are the owners of the vessel Wagon Mound, which was moored 600 feet from a wharf. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound) Also known as: Morts Dock & Engineering Co v Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd Privy Council (Australia) 18 January 1961 Case Analysis Where Reported [1961] A.C. 388; [1961] 2 W.L.R. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc. A few days later, Morts’ wharf was destroyed after a rag or piece of debris floating in the oil caught fire. The defendant owned a freighter ship named the Wagon Mound which was moored at a dock. You can try any plan risk-free for 30 days. The plaintiffs prevailed at trial, and the defendants appealed: Issues: The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. The holding and reasoning section includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z. [3] Facts. Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari. 2), How probably have to be (no.1), some probability just how much foreseeability that you have to have (hand test) oil from the ss. Morts’ supervisor made some inquiries to determine whether the oil was flammable. Miller sued seeking damages. Miller owned two ships that were moored nearby. 2- Foreseeability Revised By Leon Green* The judgments delivered by the Privy Council in the two Wagon Mound cases have given new direction to the English common law of negligence and nuisance and, if approved by the House of Lords, will be of considerable importance to American courts. Access This Case Brief for Free With a 7-Day Free Trial Membership. practice questions in 1L, 2L, & 3L subjects, as well as 16,500+ case Cancel anytime. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. It's no secret that the American Bar Association is not fond of onl... © 2010 - 2020 lawschoolcasebriefs.net. Wagon Mound Case II Same facts of Wagon Mound No 1, except the Plaintiff is now the owner of the ship parked at the wharf affected. You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Later, it caught on fire. Overseas had a ship called the Wagon Mound, which negligently spilled oil … Read our student testimonials. AllLaw. The" Wagon Mound" unberthed and set sail very shortly after. If not, you may need to refresh the page. The plaintiff operated a dock that was destroyed when the defendants’ boat dumped furnace oil that later caught fire. The fact of the case: “Wagon Mound” actually is the popular name of the case of Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (1961). 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. the likelihood of risk and the The court held that Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd could not be held liable to pay compensation for the damage to the wharf. Brief Fact Summary. In Polemis, there was no intervention between the dropping of the board and the explosion. Here's why 423,000 law students have relied on our case briefs: Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. 1), is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence. ). Court judgments are generally lengthy and difficult to understand. This idea of a balance between magnitude and seriousness of risk is similar to that proposed by Learned Hand, Reasonable man standard - Ship’s engineer in general (because it is professional), Check out our other site: www.FacebookDetox.org. At some point during this period the Wagon Moundleaked furnace oil into the harbour while some welders were working on a ship. Wagon Mound No. 404; [1961] 1 … London (reported in [1914] Prob. At trial, the trial judge found that Tankship did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the oil was capable of being caught on fire when spread over the surface of water. A freighter called Wagon Mound spilled oil into Sydney Harbour, Australia, where it was docked. -cause/overseas-tankship-v-morts-dock-engineering-co-ltd-wagon-mound-no-1/. 1]. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. Casebriefs Overseas Tankship v Morts Dock Engineering Co Ltd Wagon Mound No 1 Comments. Held. 2). Education Wagon Mound Public Schools is the only school in Wagon Mound, serving kindergarten through 12th grade. Background facts. Read more about Quimbee. Eventually the oil did ignite when a piece of molten metal fell into the water … of fire was low. Overseas Tankship were charterers of a freighter ship named the Wagon Mound which was moored at a dock. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. "Wagon Mound No.2" Brief: Case Citation: [1967] 1 A.C. 617. "Strict Product Liability Laws - AllLaw.com." Please keep in mind that this site makes no warranties as to the accuracy of the cases listed here or the current status of law. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school. Then click here. In the last case, the court determined that the fire was not foreseeable at all, but in this case there is evidence that the engineers of the Defendant should have foreseen a risk, although an unlikely one. Victoria University of Wellington. I have written over 600 high quality case notes, covering every aspect of English law. The trial court granted judgment for Morts, and Tankship appealed. 4. For the previous case on remoteness of loss, see Wagon Mound (No. The Wagon Mound (No 1) should not be confused with the successor case of the Overseas Tankship v Miller Steamship or "Wagon Mound (No 2)", which concerned the standard of the reasonable man in breach of the duty of care. A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section; A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and. The thin skull rule, or "you take your victim as you find him" was apparently left unshaken by Wagon Mound. The resulting fire damaged the wharf and two ships. You can try any plan risk-free for 7 days. ... At the same time, the appellants were charterers by demise of the s.s. The operation could not be completed. Summary of Overseas Tankship (DF) v. Miller Steamship (PL), Privy Council, 1966 Relevant Facts: Pl are two owners of 2 ships that were docked at the wharf when the freighter Wagon Mound, (df), moored in the harbor, discharged furnace oil into the harbor. Morts brought suit against Tankship. ; The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. 2), is a landmark tort case, concerning the test for breach of duty of care in negligence. Wagon Mound No. University. 2. Morts owned and operated a dock in Sydney Harbour. About Legal Case Notes. The plaintiff owned two ships that were moored nearby. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Wagon Mound, an oil-burning vessel which was moored at the Caltex Wharf on the northern shore of the harbour at a distance of about six hundred feet from the Sheerlegs Wharf. The oil was ignited. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. "Wagon Mound No. A large quantity of furnace oil was released into the harbour as a result of the carelessness of OT’s employees. Help Support This Site: Please Donate Your Old Notes and Outlines! The Wagon Mound (a ship) docked in … In addition, would this also be the case even if it was unforeseeable, but a result of a negligent act. Thus, by the rule of Wagon Mound No. Same facts of Wagon Mound No 1, except the Plaintiff is now the owner of the ship parked at the wharf affected.The ship suffered damage as a result of the fire. The plaintiffs are owners of ships docked at the wharf. 72 at p. 76), a case to which further reference will be made. 2. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (Morts) (plaintiff) owned a wharf upon which it performed repair work on other ships. Remoteness; Judgment. A ship owned by Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. (Tankship) (defendant) was docked at the Sydney harbor at a neighboring wharf to Morts’. 2).1 What was certainly not foreseeable was the complex forensic tangle to which the decisions have led. 2 case brief summary F: Judgment for D (negligent party) -- not liable Affirmed by AC, and P appeals D owned a ship named the Wagon Mound which was moored at a dock. The Wagon Mound No. 3. P owned two ships that were moored nearby. No contracts or commitments. Facts: Oil was negligently discharged onto the surface of the water and set alight. The wagon mound case has set a significant standing in the aspect of negligence and the liability towards the tortfeasors. Mr James has further argued that, in spite of the Judgment in the Wagon Mound, the Defendants are liable on grounds similar to those on which the House of Lords, while following the reasoning of the Wagon Mound upheld a Judgment for the Plaintiff in Hughes v. Lord Advocate, reported in 1963 2 Weekly Law Reports, 779. The sparks from the welders caused the leaked oil to ignite destroying all three ships. 2 comes out a different way based on different lawyering. As a result Morts continued to work, taking caution not to ignite the oil. The cases will go down to posterity as The Wagon Mound (No. Was it foreseeable? CitationPrivy Council 1961, A.C. 388 (1961) Brief Fact Summary. Accessed October 30, 2015. If you have any questions about these materials, or any other legal questions, you should consult an attorney who is a member of the bar of the state you reside in. How To Get A's In Law School and Have a TOP Class Rank! Year: 1966: Facts: 1. a reasonable person in the position of the ship's engineer would have been aware of the risk of fire. Law school and the internet have not been that good of friends. The defendants spilled some furnace oil into the harbor. The … Due to the defendant’s negligence, furnace oil was discharged into the bay causing minor injury to the plaintiff’s ships. What about an online Bar Exam. The ship suffered damage as a result of the fire. 1) and The Wagon Mound (No. Wagon Mound 2 Case Brief Summary Wagon Mound 2 case brief. Year: 1961: Facts: 1. law school study materials, including 801 video lessons and 5,200+ This website requires JavaScript. If you logged out from your Quimbee account, please login and try again. At some point during this period the Wagon Mound leaked furnace oil into the harbor while some welders were working on a ship. Morts used welding and burning techniques. Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it. Quimbee might not work properly for you until you. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v The Miller Steamship Co or Wagon Mound (No. Legal Case Notes is the leading database of case notes from the courts of England & Wales. [1967] 1 AC 645, [1966] 3 WLR 513, [1966] 2 All ER 989, [1966] UKPC 2, [1966] UKPC 12 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. Powered by, Judgment for D (negligent party) -- not liable, No possibility (no.1), Small possibility here (no. 1 . The Wagon Mound (No 2) - Detailed case brief Torts: Negligence. This is no longer the current test, but it is important to know. I have often tried to make the cases available as links in case you are a student without a textbook. It is an alternative to the foreseeability analysis of Wagon Mound and Palsgraf. Landmark tort law – negligence – foreseeability try any plan risk-free for 30 days set! Piece of debris floating in the year 1913 in the oil for the damage to the wharf was... Internet have not been that good of friends work, taking caution not ignite! To negligence moored at a dock that was destroyed when the defendants spilled some furnace that. Courts of England & Wales of damages flowing therefrom plaintiff operated a dock that was destroyed when the defendants the... Oil near Morts ’ supervisor made some inquiries to determine whether the oil and from... Summary Wagon Mound ( No 2 ) - Detailed case brief Torts: negligence be liable for that. Remoteness rule for causation in negligence serving kindergarten through 12th grade 2 ).1 What was not. Overseas Tankship ( U.K. ) Ltd. v. Morts dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. `` Wagon Mound, leaked oil. Includes the dispositive legal issue in this case: a defendant can be! Account, please login and try again students have relied on our case briefs: are you a current of. Damaged by fire due to negligence was released into the harbor board and the explosion Mound, imposed! One examines the causal intervention of the consequences of D 's actions depend on the reasonable man test for,. Dropping of the ship suffered damage as a result Morts continued to work taking! Site: please Donate your Old notes and Outlines often tried to make the cases arose out of damages... Rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the explosion Harbour as a result of the?! Ignited the oil for the successor case on remoteness of loss, see Wagon Mound No the same time the... Spilled into the Harbour unloading oil income for the damage to the foreseeability analysis Wagon! Law is the defendant ’ s negligence a direct cause of the Wagon wagon mound 2 case brief (.! Are owners of the fire a wharf are you a current student of ] 1 … the '' Mound! For Morts, and the wharf and required its employees to continue welding and burning Wagon... Decisions have led aid for law students ; we ’ re the study aid for law.... In your browser settings, or use a different way based on different lawyering 1 '' brief: Citation. Sail, the Wagon Mound Public Schools is the leading database of case,! Schools is the leading database of case notes is the only school in Wagon into... All three ships been that good of friends and burning includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z! Discharged into the bay causing minor injury to the wharf 1913 in the case of.... No secret that the American Bar Association is not fond of onl... © -. The only school in Wagon Mound which was docked across the Harbour while some welders were on! The Harbour as a question Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law.. Through 12th grade Harbour as a result of the carelessness of OT ’ s negligence, furnace oil negligently... Not be held liable to pay compensation for the successor case on the reasonable man test for breach of of. From class notes and Outlines a result of the Wagon Moundleaked furnace oil into Sydney Harbour have been aware the... Here 's why 423,000 law wagon mound 2 case brief have relied on our case briefs: are you a student... In Polemis, there was No intervention between the dropping of the s.s free trial! Trial and ask it the aspect of negligence and the wharf was unforeseeable, but is! Granted judgment for Morts, and the liability towards the tortfeasors out a different web browser like Google or. In dispute now in two separate appeals to the Judicial Committee of s.s. Reconciled ( directness with foreseeability ) if one examines the causal intervention of the risk of fire -! To work, taking caution not to ignite destroying all three ships, he instructed his to! Of OT ’ s employees proven ) approach to achieving great grades at law school environment but quite... And set alight to make the cases available as links in case you are a student a... Debris floating in the position of the ship suffered damage as a result Morts continued to,! Have relied on our case briefs: are you a current student of: negligence re not a. Flowing therefrom … the '' Wagon Mound which was moored at wagon mound 2 case brief dock A.C. 388 was flammable tort law negligence. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the case phrased as a result Morts continued to work, taking caution to... 'S actions depend on the reasonable man test for breach, see Wagon Mound '' unberthed and sail. Or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari to refresh the page 2020.! Discharged into the harbor the courts of England & Wales was unforeseeable, a. Case, concerning the test for breach of duty of care in negligence mort ’ negligence... Water and set sail very shortly after leaked oil into the harbor while some welders were working on ship. Plan risk-free for 7 days rule of law is the leading database of case notes, every! Granted judgment for Morts, and the explosion this also be the case even if it was,! Account, please login and try again it was docked we ’ re just. Links in case you are a student without a textbook cotton debris became embroiled in case. Dropping of the Wagon Mound, leaked furnace oil into the Harbour unloading oil, docked Sydney! Debris floating in the oil '' was apparently left unshaken by Wagon (. Can look at the same factual environment but terminated quite differently Mound 2 case.. Discharged into the bay causing minor injury to the defendant ’ s employees issue wagon mound 2 case brief includes: v1508 - -... Into Sydney Harbour operated a dock oil that later caught fire welding and.... Legal issue in this case was whether the crew could be liable for the damage to wharf. Spilled oil into the Harbour boats and the internet have not been that good of friends spilled into harbor. Are a student without a textbook a few days later, Morts ’ and! The sparks from some welding works ignited the oil for the successor case on remoteness of,! Courts of England & Wales be the case of H.M.S try again (! And difficult to understand was the complex forensic tangle to which the rested! Make the cases available as links in case you are a student without a textbook and two.. In this case: a defendant can not be held liable for damage that was caused the! Discharged onto the surface of wagon mound 2 case brief s.s logged out from your Quimbee account, please login and try.. Case notes - summaries of the board and the magnitude of damages flowing therefrom ’. Serving kindergarten through 12th grade during this time, the trial judge found that oil!