General Construction Limited (Appellant) v (1) Chue Wing & Co Ltd (2) Ibrahim Cassam & Co Ltd (in Liquidation) (Respondents) (Mauritius)

General Construction Limited (Appellant) v (1) Chue Wing & Co Ltd (2) Ibrahim Cassam & Co Ltd (in Liquidation) (Respondents) (Mauritius)

The appellant failed to prove that the collapse of the crane was caused by an event of force majeure, as cyclones of the relevant intensity were foreseeable in Mauritius and the appellant did not establish that all reasonable and practicable precautions were taken to guard against such an event. The award of interest to the second respondent was appropriate and within the jurisdiction of the appellate court to ensure complete justice.

Citation
[2013] UKPC 30
Parties
Appellant: General Construction Limited; Respondent: Chue Wing & Co Ltd; Respondent: Ibrahim Cassam & Co Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
15 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Force Majeure, Liability for Things Under One's Guard, Interest on Judgment Debts
Tort Delict Civil Procedure Force Majeure Liability for Things Under One's Guard Interest on Judgment Debts

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

General Construction Limited

Appellant

Chue Wing & Co Ltd

Respondent

Ibrahim Cassam & Co Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant established that the crane collapse was caused by force majeure under article 1384 of the Civil Code
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Civil Appeal erred in awarding interest to the second respondent after judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to prove that the collapse of the crane was caused by an event of force majeure, as cyclones of the relevant intensity were foreseeable in Mauritius and the appellant did not establish that all reasonable and practicable precautions were taken to guard against such an event. The award of interest to the second respondent was appropriate and within the jurisdiction of the appellate court to ensure complete justice.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed on both the main issue of force majeure and the award of interest.
  • Interest to be paid to the second respondent at the legal rate from the date of the original statement of claim until satisfaction of judgment.