Fish & Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK & Anor [2012] EWHC 1717 (Admlty) (25 June 2012)

Fish & Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK & Anor [2012] EWHC 1717 (Admlty) (25 June 2012)

SSUK was not legally responsible for the tortious acts as it did not have possession or control of the STEVE IRWIN, did not direct or authorise the acts, and was not so involved in the commission of the tort as to make the infringing act its own. The acts were carried out by SSCS, which had operational control and direction over the vessel and campaign.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1717 (Admlty)
Parties
Claimant: Fish & Fish Limited; First Defendant: Sea Shepherd UK; Second Defendant: Sea Shepherd Conservation Society; Third Defendant: Paul Watson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (tort) / Trial of Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Claim against SSUK on preliminary issue dismissed
Legal Topics
Trespass, Conversion, Joint Tortfeasance, Vicarious Liability, Agency, Common Design
Tort Law Admiralty Law Trespass Conversion Joint Tortfeasance Vicarious Liability Agency Common Design

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fish & Fish Limited

Claimant

Sea Shepherd UK

First Defendant

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

Second Defendant

Paul Watson

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (tort) / Trial of Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SSUK was legally responsible for the conduct of the 'attack' on 17 June 2010
  2. 2 Whether SSUK was party to a common design with the other defendants to commit the tortious acts

Ratio Decidendi

SSUK was not legally responsible for the tortious acts as it did not have possession or control of the STEVE IRWIN, did not direct or authorise the acts, and was not so involved in the commission of the tort as to make the infringing act its own. The acts were carried out by SSCS, which had operational control and direction over the vessel and campaign.

Court Disposition

Claim against SSUK on preliminary issue dismissed

Orders

  • Preliminary issue answered in the negative: SSUK not liable for the alleged torts