In re Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd Case Brief - Rule of Law: The exact way in which damage or injury results need not be foreseen This rule was espoused by the courts in the case of Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co (1921) All ER 40 which is popularly known as Re Polemis. 560). In Re Polemis. Facts. 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. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921. School The University of Sydney; Course Title CLAW 1001; Type. The case of Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd (1921) or popularly known as re polemis is a very significant case that had set the tone with regards to dealing with negligence of personnel and the action for damages resulting thereof. The spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting in the destruction of the ship. Unknown to the stevedores, there was a leakage of petrol in the hold of the ship and thus there was inflammable vapour. Due to leakage of the tins some petrol collected on the hold of the ship. This preview shows page 140 - 142 out of 189 pages. Due to leakage in those tins, some of their contents collected in the hold of the ship. 114 indiankanoon.org link casemine.com link legitquest.com link This was a dispute between the charterers and owners of … A heavy plank fell into the hold, created a spark, and caused an explosion which destroyed the vessel. It laid the foundation of the modern law of negligence, establishing general principles of the duty of care. 560, the defendant hired (chartered) a ship. Overseas Tankship (UK) v. Morts Dock & Engineering (The Wagon Mound, No.1) (1961 - Privy Council) WAGON MOUND NUMBER ONE BITCHES, … 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. [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. In Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd In Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd is an early Court of Appeal case which held that a defendant is liable for all losses which are a direct consequence of their negligence. 560, the defendant hired (chartered) a ship. Those four years had wit- References: [1921] 3 KB 560 Coram: Scrutton L.J Ratio: A wrongdoer was liable for all the direct consequences of his negligent act, even though those consequences could not reasonably have been anticipated. 3 K.B. Take your favorite fandoms with you and never miss a beat. [2] The matter was taken to arbitration. Further, the proximity of the act to the outcome is close enough here to create a duty. 560 is a famous United Kingdom tort case on causation and remoteness. In Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co., [1921] 3 KB 560 Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co, Ltd All ER Rep 40 An authority on the 'direct consequences' test for causation, which has been superseded by the test of 'reasonable foreseeability' in negligence and nuisance, but which still remains the test for causation in intentional torts While engaged on the service she was in Casablanca and it became necessary to shift a … In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. Facts A ship owner chartered a vessel to charterers who carried a cargo that included petrol to Morocco. 560, All E.R. In Re an Arbitration between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) 3 KB 560 : (1921) All ER Rep. 40 Sl. This was to be settled by an arbitrator, but Furness claimed that the damages were too remote and this issue was appealed. Overseas Tankship (UK) v. Morts Dock & Engineering (The Wagon Mound, No.1) (1961 - Privy Council) WAGON MOUND NUMBER ONE BITCHES, … 560. Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd (1921) is an English tort case on causation and remoteness in the law of negligence. Uploaded By jstals. C.A. The claimants were the owners of the Greek steamship Thrusyboiilos and the respondents, Furness Withy & Co., were time charterers. 295-296 Facts: The plaintiffs’ boat was destroyed and they sued the … 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. sustained Decision in No1 overturned In Re Polemis and Furnes s Withy Co 1921 3. In Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd is an early case in which the Court of Appeal held that a defendant is liable for all losses which are a direct consequence of their negligence. A ship was being [...] Definition of Polemis V. Fur-ness, Withy, Re ([1921] 3 K. . Furness chartered the Polemis to carry a cargo of petrol and benzene. … 1. [3], An exception that still applies is the talem qualem rule, (or "eggshell skull rule"), which means "you take your victim as you find him"; but this applies ONLY to personal injury, as in Smith v Leech Brain. 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. Pages 189; Ratings 100% (3) 3 out of 3 people found this document helpful. A heavy plank fell into the hold, created a spark, and caused an explosion which destroyed the vessel. Results 1 to 1 of 1 Thread: In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. LinkBack. Brief Fact Summary. It is summarized in [1921] 3 K. B. at p. 561, and clauses 3, 5, and the relevant portion of … Polemis (plaintiff) owned a ship and chartered it to the defendants. Before this decision in The Wagon Mound No.1 defendants were held responsible to compensate for all the direct consequences of their negligence, a rule clarified by the decision in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co Ltd [1921] 3 KB 560. Pages 189; Ratings 100% (3) 3 out of 3 people found this document helpful. 40. Due to leakage of the tins some petrol collected on the hold of the ship. In this case, charterers employed stevedores to unload a ship. An Overview of the Rule of Reasonable Forseeability. 40. Sentences for Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd It has the beneficial effect of simplifying and thereby expediting court decisions in these cases, although the application of strict liability may seem unfair or harsh, as in Re Polemis. The extent of liability where the injuries resultant from tortious negligence are entirely unforeseeable. Re Polemis & Furness Withy & Company Ltd. [1921] 3 KB 560 Some Stevedores carelessly dropped a plank of wood into the hold of a ship.