Colour Quest Ltd & Ors v Total Downstream UK Plc & Ors (Rev 1) [2009] EWHC 540 (Comm) (20 March 2009)

Colour Quest Ltd & Ors v Total Downstream UK Plc & Ors (Rev 1) [2009] EWHC 540 (Comm) (20 March 2009)

The court found that either Total or HOSL was vicariously liable for the negligence of supervisors at Buncefield, based on admissions and the operational control exercised. Liability for economic loss and property damage was established, subject to proof of title and quantum. The contractual arrangements and operating regulations determined the allocation of liability and indemnity between Total and Chevron.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 540 (Comm)
Parties
Claimants: Colour Quest Limited and Others; Claimants: Douglas Jessop & Others; Claimants: West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd and United Kingdom Oil Pipelines Ltd; Claimant: BP Oil UK Limited; Claimant: Shell UK Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Total Downstream UK PLC; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Total UK Limited; Defendant/part 20 Defendant: Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited; Part 20 Defendant/third Party: Chevron Limited; Fourth Party: Total Milford Haven Refinery Limited; Part 20 Defendant: TAV Engineering Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Preliminary Issues Trial / Judgment Following Trial of Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Liability established against Total and/or HOSL for negligence and nuisance, subject to proof of quantum and title to sue.
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Negligence, Nuisance, Indemnity, Wilful Misconduct, Joint Venture Liability, Economic Loss, Foreseeability
Tort Contract Commercial Law Vicarious Liability Negligence Nuisance Indemnity Wilful Misconduct +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colour Quest Limited and Others

Claimants

Douglas Jessop & Others

Claimants

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd and United Kingdom Oil Pipelines Ltd

Claimants

BP Oil UK Limited

Claimant

Shell UK Limited

Claimant

Total Downstream UK PLC

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Total UK Limited

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited

Defendant/part 20 Defendant

Chevron Limited

Part 20 Defendant/third Party

Total Milford Haven Refinery Limited

Fourth Party

TAV Engineering Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Preliminary Issues Trial / Judgment Following Trial of Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which entity is vicariously liable for the negligence of supervisors at Buncefield?
  2. 2 Recoverability of economic loss for claimants outside the site perimeter
  3. 3 Scope of indemnities under joint venture agreements

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that either Total or HOSL was vicariously liable for the negligence of supervisors at Buncefield, based on admissions and the operational control exercised. Liability for economic loss and property damage was established, subject to proof of title and quantum. The contractual arrangements and operating regulations determined the allocation of liability and indemnity between Total and Chevron.

Court Disposition

Liability established against Total and/or HOSL for negligence and nuisance, subject to proof of quantum and title to sue.

Orders

  • Summary judgment for claimants on vicarious liability for negligence of supervisors.
  • Findings of fact and law binding on all parties in Buncefield actions.