Feuiltault Solution Systems Inc. v. Zurich Canada

Feuiltault Solution Systems Inc. v. Zurich Canada

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that a fortuitous event caused the damage; the court found the packing was insufficient and the pressure‑treated wood unsuitable, condensation from wet dunnage was the likely cause, and exclusion clause 4.3 therefore bars recovery; action dismissed.

Citation
2011 FC 260
Parties
Plaintiff: Feuiltault Solution Systems Inc.; Defendant: Zurich Canada; Defendant (settled): Kuehne & Nagel Ltée; Defendant: Blue Anchor Line; Defendant / Third Parties: Oceanship Beheer III / the ship Maersk Palermo and the owners
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Action in Rem / Final Judgment (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Action dismissed; judgment for defendant (Zurich Canada)
Legal Topics
All Risks Policy, Inherent Vice, Insufficient Packing Exclusion (clause 4.3), Fortuity, Condensation (container Sweating), Cargo Damage, Expert Evidence, Costs
Source Language
English
Admiralty Marine Insurance Commercial Law Contract Law Evidence All Risks Policy Inherent Vice Insufficient Packing Exclusion (clause 4.3) +5 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Feuiltault Solution Systems Inc.

Plaintiff

Zurich Canada

Defendant

Kuehne & Nagel Ltée

Defendant (settled)

Blue Anchor Line

Defendant

Oceanship Beheer III / the ship Maersk Palermo and the owners

Defendant / Third Parties

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Action in Rem / Final Judgment (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff proved loss resulted from a fortuity during transit
  2. 2 Whether the proximate cause of the damage was insufficiency or unsuitability of packing (Institute Cargo Clauses A clause 4.3)
  3. 3 Whether condensation from high moisture content dunnage caused the corrosion

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that a fortuitous event caused the damage; the court found the packing was insufficient and the pressure‑treated wood unsuitable, condensation from wet dunnage was the likely cause, and exclusion clause 4.3 therefore bars recovery; action dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; judgment for defendant (Zurich Canada)

Orders

  • Action dismissed with costs to be assessed in a distinct order
  • Parties to agree on costs or file written submissions by March 31, 2011 including taxable costs or lump sum claimed