Tyrrell v. Paton & Hendry [1905] ScotLR 43_89 (21 November 1905)

Tyrrell v. Paton & Hendry [1905] ScotLR 43_89 (21 November 1905)

Where a pursuer avers that a structural defect existed prior to the voyage and was not obviously reparable by the crew, the action is relevant and should not be dismissed on relevancy; the question of whether the defect was such as the crew could have remedied is a matter for proof.

Citation
[1905] ScotLR 43_89
Parties
Pursuer: Samuel Tyrrell; Defenders: Paton & Hendry
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 November 1905
Procedural Posture
Action of Damages for Personal Injury / Appeal From Dismissal on Relevancy
Outcome
Lord Ordinary's interlocutor recalled; proof allowed; action reinstated for inquiry.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Reparation, Master and Servant, Shipowner's Liability, Defective Equipment, Duty of Care
Tort Employment Law Maritime Law Negligence Reparation Master and Servant Shipowner's Liability Defective Equipment +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Tyrrell

Pursuer

Paton & Hendry

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Action of Damages for Personal Injury / Appeal From Dismissal on Relevancy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's averments disclosed a relevant case of negligence against the shipowners for injuries caused by a pre-existing defect in the ship's structure
  2. 2 Whether the defect was of a kind that the crew could or should have remedied, absolving the owners of liability

Ratio Decidendi

Where a pursuer avers that a structural defect existed prior to the voyage and was not obviously reparable by the crew, the action is relevant and should not be dismissed on relevancy; the question of whether the defect was such as the crew could have remedied is a matter for proof.

Court Disposition

Lord Ordinary's interlocutor recalled; proof allowed; action reinstated for inquiry.

Orders

  • Recall of Lord Ordinary's interlocutor dismissing the action
  • Order for issues and proof to be allowed