McCallum v. Odette

McCallum v. Odette

The court recognized that if an anchored vessel places its anchor in the approach to a wharf without indicating its position and an incoming vessel using ordinary care is damaged, liability may attach to the anchored vessel; however the Supreme Court was equally divided on the facts and law, so the Maritime Court of Ontario's finding that both vessels were in fault and its apportionment of damages (each to pay one half) was affirmed.

Citation
(1882) 7 SCR 36
Parties
Appellant (owner of Schooner M.c. Upper): L. McCallum; Respondent (owner of Steamer Erie Belle): D.B. Odette
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 March 1882
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal From the Maritime Court of Ontario / Supreme Court of Canada Decision on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; judgment of the Maritime Court of Ontario affirmed; no costs.
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Anchor Placement and Marking, Custom and Usage in Navigation, Apportionment of Damages, Collision Rules
Source Language
English
Maritime Law Admiralty Tort Negligence Property Damage Contributory Negligence Anchor Placement and Marking Custom and Usage in Navigation +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L. McCallum

Appellant (owner of Schooner M.c. Upper)

D.B. Odette

Respondent (owner of Steamer Erie Belle)

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Cross Appeal From the Maritime Court of Ontario / Supreme Court of Canada Decision on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the M.C. Upper was negligent in dropping and leaving an unmarked anchor in the approach to the wharf
  2. 2 Whether the Erie Belle was contributorily negligent in entering and backing from the wharf
  3. 3 Whether absence of a buoy was negligence given the local custom

Ratio Decidendi

The court recognized that if an anchored vessel places its anchor in the approach to a wharf without indicating its position and an incoming vessel using ordinary care is damaged, liability may attach to the anchored vessel; however the Supreme Court was equally divided on the facts and law, so the Maritime Court of Ontario's finding that both vessels were in fault and its apportionment of damages (each to pay one half) was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; judgment of the Maritime Court of Ontario affirmed; no costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Cross-appeal dismissed