Fish &Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK [2011] ScotCS CSOH_122 (29 July 2011)

Fish &Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd UK [2011] ScotCS CSOH_122 (29 July 2011)

The petitioners have established a prima facie case that the vessel 'Steve Irwin', owned by the first respondents, was actively involved in causing damage and loss, falling within section 47(2)(a) of the 1956 Act. The requirements for interim diligence under section 15K of the 1987 Act are met, and the arrestment is reasonable given the risk of unenforceability without security.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSOH_122
Parties
Petitioner: Fish & Fish Limited; First Respondent: Sea Shepherd UK; Second Respondent: Sea Shepherd Conservation Society; Third Respondent: Captain Paul Watson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Petition for Provisional and Protective Measures / Hearing for Recall of Arrestment and Underlying Warrant
Outcome
Motion for recall of arrestment and underlying warrant refused
Legal Topics
Arrestment of Ships, Interim Diligence, Jurisdiction, Trespass to Property, Conversion, Damages
Admiralty Law Civil Procedure International Law Arrestment of Ships Interim Diligence Jurisdiction Trespass to Property Conversion +1 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fish & Fish Limited

Petitioner

Sea Shepherd UK

First Respondent

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

Second Respondent

Captain Paul Watson

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Provisional and Protective Measures / Hearing for Recall of Arrestment and Underlying Warrant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether arrestment of the vessel 'Steve Irwin' is competent under section 47 of the Administration of Justice Act 1956
  2. 2 Whether the petitioners have a prima facie case against the first respondents
  3. 3 Whether the claim falls within 'damage done by a ship' or 'loss or damage to goods carried in a ship' under section 47(2)

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioners have established a prima facie case that the vessel 'Steve Irwin', owned by the first respondents, was actively involved in causing damage and loss, falling within section 47(2)(a) of the 1956 Act. The requirements for interim diligence under section 15K of the 1987 Act are met, and the arrestment is reasonable given the risk of unenforceability without security.

Court Disposition

Motion for recall of arrestment and underlying warrant refused

Orders

  • Arrestment of the vessel 'Steve Irwin' and underlying warrant affirmed
  • Case to be put out By Order for further discussion on alternative security and substantive interlocutor