Vaccher et al. v. Kaufman et al.

Vaccher et al. v. Kaufman et al.

The owner failed to discharge the heavy burden under s.647 to show he was in no way at fault or privy because employing and leaving inexperienced crew on night watch constituted owner fault; accordingly the owner could not limit liability, and s.649 did not salvage limitation in these circumstances.

Citation
[1981] 1 SCR 301
Parties
Appellant/owner of Vessel Blue Waters: Donald Vaccher; Appellant/vessel: Blue Waters; Respondent/owner of MV Centennial 71: Donald Henry Kaufman; Respondent/crew of MV Centennial 71: Jan Jacobson
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 April 1981
Procedural Posture
Maritime Collision Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Federal Court of Appeal; Final Decision on Limitation of Liability Issue
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Liability, Negligence, Respondeat Superior, Canada Shipping Act Interpretation, Crew Competence and Owner Liability
Source Language
English
Maritime Law Admiralty Law Tort Law Statutory Interpretation Limitation of Liability Negligence Respondeat Superior Canada Shipping Act Interpretation +1 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donald Vaccher

Appellant/owner of Vessel Blue Waters

Blue Waters

Appellant/vessel

Donald Henry Kaufman

Respondent/owner of MV Centennial 71

Jan Jacobson

Respondent/crew of MV Centennial 71

Procedural Posture

Maritime Collision Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Federal Court of Appeal; Final Decision on Limitation of Liability Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the shipowner was entitled to limit liability under s.647 of the Canada Shipping Act by showing the loss occurred without his actual fault or privity
  2. 2 Whether the owner’s decision to employ and leave inexperienced crew on watch constituted fault or privity preventing limitation of liability
  3. 3 Whether s.649 applies to preserve limitation where the owner acted as master in assigning crew duties

Ratio Decidendi

The owner failed to discharge the heavy burden under s.647 to show he was in no way at fault or privy because employing and leaving inexperienced crew on night watch constituted owner fault; accordingly the owner could not limit liability, and s.649 did not salvage limitation in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to respondents
  • Portion of trial judgment permitting limitation of liability (300,000 gold francs) reversed