Clackamas v. Cape D'Or

Clackamas v. Cape D'Or

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge correctly found that the steamship was proceeding at an excessive speed in dense fog and had inadequate lookout, such that she could not have avoided the schooner within the distance of visibility; the schooner was not 'not under command' under art.15(e) and gave appropriate signals, so the steamship is solely liable for the collision.

Citation
[1926] SCR 331
Parties
Appellant (defendant): ss Clackamas; Respondents (plaintiffs): Owners of the schooner Cape D'Or
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 December 1925
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Collision / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Exchequer Court of Canada (nova Scotia Admiralty District)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Exchequer Court affirmed.
Legal Topics
Navigation in Fog, Speed and Lookout Obligations, Sound Signal Regulations, Collision Liability, Interpretation of Art.15(c) and (e)
Source Language
English
Admiralty Law Shipping and Navigation Maritime Torts Navigation in Fog Speed and Lookout Obligations Sound Signal Regulations Collision Liability Interpretation of Art.15(c) and (e)

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ss Clackamas

Appellant (defendant)

Owners of the schooner Cape D'Or

Respondents (plaintiffs)

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Collision / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Exchequer Court of Canada (nova Scotia Admiralty District)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the steamship proceeding at an excessive speed in fog such that it could not avoid collision within visibility distance?
  2. 2 Was the lookout on the steamship adequate?
  3. 3 Were the schooner’s fog signals compliant with the regulations?

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge correctly found that the steamship was proceeding at an excessive speed in dense fog and had inadequate lookout, such that she could not have avoided the schooner within the distance of visibility; the schooner was not 'not under command' under art.15(e) and gave appropriate signals, so the steamship is solely liable for the collision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Exchequer Court affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of the Exchequer Court (Nova Scotia Admiralty District) holding ss Clackamas solely responsible for the collision affirmed.