Moatschappij Hoek-Van-Holland v. Clyde Shipping Co., Ltd the & Aranmore [1902] ScotLR 40_194 (11 December 1902)

Moatschappij Hoek-Van-Holland v. Clyde Shipping Co., Ltd the & Aranmore [1902] ScotLR 40_194 (11 December 1902)

The trawler was solely to blame for the collision due to her sudden and improper manoeuvre across the course of the steamer. The mate of the steamer, though not giving prescribed sound signals, acted with reasonable promptitude in the emergency created by the trawler's fault, and any presumption of fault from failure to signal was rebutted as signals would have been too late to prevent the collision. The steamer was not at fault.

Citation
[1902] ScotLR 40_194
Parties
Pursuer: Moatschappij Hoek-van-Holland; Defender: Clyde Shipping Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 December 1902
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Collision Damages / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House
Outcome
Defenders assoilzied (absolved); action dismissed.
Legal Topics
Ship Collision, Negligence, Liability Apportionment, Presumption of Fault, Rebuttal of Presumption, Sound Signals, Good Seamanship
Admiralty Maritime Law Tort Ship Collision Negligence Liability Apportionment Presumption of Fault Rebuttal of Presumption +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moatschappij Hoek-van-Holland

Pursuer

Clyde Shipping Company, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Collision Damages / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trawler or the steamer, or both, were at fault for the collision
  2. 2 Whether the steamer's failure to give prescribed sound signals constituted fault
  3. 3 Whether the mate of the steamer acted with due promptitude in the emergency

Ratio Decidendi

The trawler was solely to blame for the collision due to her sudden and improper manoeuvre across the course of the steamer. The mate of the steamer, though not giving prescribed sound signals, acted with reasonable promptitude in the emergency created by the trawler's fault, and any presumption of fault from failure to signal was rebutted as signals would have been too late to prevent the collision. The steamer was not at fault.

Court Disposition

Defenders assoilzied (absolved); action dismissed.

Orders

  • Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled.
  • Defenders assoilzied from conclusions of the action.