Ferryways NV v Associated British Ports

Ferryways NV v Associated British Ports

The Claimant was entitled to intervene as undisclosed principal and was the employer of the deceased chief officer under the contract of employment. The Claimant suffered a loss by incurring liability for death benefits and repatriation expenses. The exclusion and limitation clauses in the stevedoring agreement did not bar recovery as the losses were direct and natural results of the Defendant’s breach. Notice of claim was timely given.

Parties
Claimant: Ferryways NV; Defendant: Associated British Ports
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (preliminary Issues) / Judgment on Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant on all substantive preliminary issues except as to exclusion under clause 9 (Defendant cannot rely on exclusion), but clause 10 (notice) applies.
Legal Topics
Undisclosed Principal, Employer Liability, Exclusion Clauses, Notice of Claim, Indemnity, Personal Injury (death)
Contract Law Agency Law Employment Law Maritime Law Undisclosed Principal Employer Liability Exclusion Clauses Notice of Claim +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 Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ferryways NV

Claimant

Associated British Ports

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (preliminary Issues) / Judgment on Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether negligence by the tugmaster driver amounted to breach of contract by the Defendant
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant suffered a loss as a result of the accident
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant was the employer of the deceased chief officer

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant was entitled to intervene as undisclosed principal and was the employer of the deceased chief officer under the contract of employment. The Claimant suffered a loss by incurring liability for death benefits and repatriation expenses. The exclusion and limitation clauses in the stevedoring agreement did not bar recovery as the losses were direct and natural results of the Defendant’s breach. Notice of claim was timely given.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant on all substantive preliminary issues except as to exclusion under clause 9 (Defendant cannot rely on exclusion), but clause 10 (notice) applies.

Orders

  • Declaration that negligence by the tugmaster driver would amount to breach of contract by the Defendant
  • Declaration that the Claimant suffered a loss as a result of the accident