S.S. Richelieu v. Cie Navigation Saguenay et Lac St. Jean

S.S. Richelieu v. Cie Navigation Saguenay et Lac St. Jean

Majority held both vessels were at fault: the Richelieu signalled too late and therefore contributed to the collision (one-third liability) while the Roberval failed to keep a proper lookout and persisted in a hazardous manoeuvre and failure to stop engines in time (two-thirds liability); accordingly the Exchequer Court judgment was modified to apportion liability 2/3 to Roberval and 1/3 to Richelieu and the counter-claim allowed in part.

Citation
[1945] SCR 659
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: S.S. Richelieu and Her Owners; Respondent / Plaintiff: La Cie de Navigation Saguenay et Lac St-Jean and Others (owners of S.S. Roberval, her master, crew and cargo owners)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 June 1945
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Appeal (collision) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Exchequer Court of Canada (quebec Admiralty District)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Exchequer Court modified; liability apportioned between parties (Roberval two-thirds, Richelieu one-third); counter-claim allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Ship Collision, Navigation Rules, Whistle Signals, Lookout Duty, Apportionment of Liability, Seamanship
Source Language
English
Admiralty Maritime Law Tort / Negligence Transportation / Shipping Ship Collision Navigation Rules Whistle Signals Lookout Duty +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S.S. Richelieu and Her Owners

Appellant / Defendant

La Cie de Navigation Saguenay et Lac St-Jean and Others (owners of S.S. Roberval, her master, crew and cargo owners)

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Appeal (collision) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Exchequer Court of Canada (quebec Admiralty District)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether one or both ships were at fault for the collision
  2. 2 Whether required signals were given at sufficient distance and in sufficient time to avoid danger
  3. 3 Whether a proper lookout was maintained

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held both vessels were at fault: the Richelieu signalled too late and therefore contributed to the collision (one-third liability) while the Roberval failed to keep a proper lookout and persisted in a hazardous manoeuvre and failure to stop engines in time (two-thirds liability); accordingly the Exchequer Court judgment was modified to apportion liability 2/3 to Roberval and 1/3 to Richelieu and the counter-claim allowed in part.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Exchequer Court modified; liability apportioned between parties (Roberval two-thirds, Richelieu one-third); counter-claim allowed in part.

Orders

  • S.S. Richelieu condemned to pay one-third of the damages suffered by the S.S. Roberval and the other plaintiffs.
  • S.S. Roberval ordered to pay two-thirds of the damages suffered by the S.S. Richelieu (counter-claim allowed in part).