Lambert v VJ Glover Ltd

Lambert v VJ Glover Ltd

The court found that the vessel was properly moored and fendered, adequately lit, and that the Claimant was not instructed to dispose of rubbish overboard. The Claimant’s injury was caused solely by his own failure to take reasonable care, specifically by placing his hand in an obviously dangerous position between the vessel and the quay. There was no breach of duty by the Defendants, and no causative link between any alleged deficiencies and the injury. The claim was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Elliot Lambert; First Defendant: V J Glover Limited; Second Defendant: Carl Friday (also known as Carl Snell)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim (admiralty) / Judgment After Trial on Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Occupiers Liability, Fundamental Dishonesty Under S.57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
Admiralty Law Personal Injury Tort Law Duty of Care Negligence Vicarious Liability Occupiers Liability Fundamental Dishonesty Under S.57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elliot Lambert

Claimant

V J Glover Limited

First Defendant

Carl Friday (also known as Carl Snell)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim (admiralty) / Judgment After Trial on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants owed the Claimant a duty of care and the scope of that duty
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants breached that duty of care and causation
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant’s claim is fundamentally dishonest under s.57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the vessel was properly moored and fendered, adequately lit, and that the Claimant was not instructed to dispose of rubbish overboard. The Claimant’s injury was caused solely by his own failure to take reasonable care, specifically by placing his hand in an obviously dangerous position between the vessel and the quay. There was no breach of duty by the Defendants, and no causative link between any alleged deficiencies and the injury. The claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed