Clyde Shipping Co., Ltd (Owners of the "Flying Wizard") v. Miller (Owner of the "Sunbeam.") [1907] ScotLR 920 (11 July 1907)

Clyde Shipping Co., Ltd (Owners of the "Flying Wizard") v. Miller (Owner of the "Sunbeam.") [1907] ScotLR 920 (11 July 1907)

The defender failed to prove that the collision was due solely to the fault or incapacity of the compulsory pilot. The evidence showed the ship did not answer her helm due to her list, a condition for which the owners and their crew were responsible. The statutory exemption under section 633 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 did not apply, and the owners of the 'Sunbeam' remained liable for the damage caused.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 920
Parties
Pursuer: Clyde Shipping Company, Limited (Owners of the 'Flying Wizard'); Defender: William S. Miller (Owner of the 'Sunbeam')
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 July 1907
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (damages for Collision) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, First Division
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute affirmed
Legal Topics
Ship Collision, Pilot Liability, Onus of Proof, Statutory Exemption, Merchant Shipping Act 1894
Maritime Law Tort Law Ship Collision Pilot Liability Onus of Proof Statutory Exemption Merchant Shipping Act 1894

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clyde Shipping Company, Limited (Owners of the 'Flying Wizard')

Pursuer

William S. Miller (Owner of the 'Sunbeam')

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (damages for Collision) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the owner of a vessel is exempt from liability for collision damage under section 633 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 when a compulsory pilot is in charge.
  2. 2 Whether the collision was caused solely by the fault of the pilot or by the fault of those in charge of the vessel (trim/list).

Ratio Decidendi

The defender failed to prove that the collision was due solely to the fault or incapacity of the compulsory pilot. The evidence showed the ship did not answer her helm due to her list, a condition for which the owners and their crew were responsible. The statutory exemption under section 633 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 did not apply, and the owners of the 'Sunbeam' remained liable for the damage caused.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute affirmed

Orders

  • Defender liable in damages for the collision.
  • Defender liable for expenses of the appeal.