Travel Services (Seychelles) Limited vs Marine Charter Association (Seychelles) and another (CS 26.2012) [2014] SCSC 101 (21 March 2014)

Travel Services (Seychelles) Limited vs Marine Charter Association (Seychelles) and another (CS 26.2012) [2014] SCSC 101 (21 March 2014)

The first defendant is liable for the damage to the plaintiff's boat engines because it supplied contaminated fuel, and failed to specifically deny the particulars of loss in its pleadings, which are therefore deemed admitted. However, the contamination was caused by the second defendant's negligent delivery, but the first defendant contributed by failing to supervise the unloading. Indemnity is apportioned equally between the first and second defendants.

Citation
[2014] SCSC 101
Parties
Plaintiff: Travel Services (Seychelles) Limited; First Defendant: Marine Charter Association (Seychelles); Second Defendant: Seychelles Petroleum Company Limited
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
21 March 2014
Case Number
CS 26.2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the first defendant; indemnity apportioned equally between first and second defendants.
Legal Topics
Damages, Negligence, Indemnity, Pleadings, Adulterated Goods
Source Language
English
Contract Law Tort Law Damages Negligence Indemnity Pleadings Adulterated Goods

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Travel Services (Seychelles) Limited

Plaintiff

Marine Charter Association (Seychelles)

First Defendant

Seychelles Petroleum Company Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defendant is liable for the damage suffered by the plaintiff
  2. 2 What is the loss and damage that the plaintiff suffered
  3. 3 Whether the first defendant is entitled to indemnification by the second defendant and to what extent

Ratio Decidendi

The first defendant is liable for the damage to the plaintiff's boat engines because it supplied contaminated fuel, and failed to specifically deny the particulars of loss in its pleadings, which are therefore deemed admitted. However, the contamination was caused by the second defendant's negligent delivery, but the first defendant contributed by failing to supervise the unloading. Indemnity is apportioned equally between the first and second defendants.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the first defendant; indemnity apportioned equally between first and second defendants.

Orders

  • First defendant to pay plaintiff SR 1,727,009.37 plus costs and interest at legal rate until payment in full.
  • Second defendant to indemnify first defendant for one half of the damages and costs.