Ship surveyor not liable to cargo owner
LAW REPORT v 18 August 1995
Friday 18 August 1995
A marine classification society, when surveying a ship and pronouncing it seaworthy, owed no duty of care to the owner of cargo on board that ship and was not liable to the cargo owner for losses incurred when the ship sank.
The House of Lords by a majority (Lord Lloyd dissenting) dismissed an appeal by the plaintiff cargo owners, Marc Rich & Co AG, V/O Raznoimport, VPO Sojuzpolimetall and Pertusola Sud, and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal ( 1 WLR 1071), which allowed an appeal by the third defendant marine classification society, Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (NKK), against the preliminary ruling of Mr Justice Hirst ( 2 Lloyd's Rep 481).
The judge had ruled that NKK owed a duty of care to the cargo owners when surveying a ship, the Nicholas H, owned by the first defendants, Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd, and chartered by the second defendants, Bethmarine Co Ltd, for a voyage from Peru and Chile to Italy and the Soviet Union. The ship was pronounced seaworthy by one of NKK's surveyors, after a crack in its hull had been temporarily repaired while at anchor off the US coast, but it later sank, on 9 March 1986, with a total loss of the plaintiffs' cargo worth more than US$6m. The plaintiffs' claims against the ship owners and charterers were respectively settled or abandoned.
Peter Gross QC and Andrew Baker (Lovell White Durrant) for the cargo owners; Richard Aikens QC, Jonathan Harvie QC and David Edwards (Nabarro Nathanson) for NKK.
Lord Steyn said that in England no classification society, engaged by ship owners to perform a survey, had ever been held liable to cargo owners on the ground of careless conduct of a survey.
NKK, founded in 1899 and headquartered in Tokyo, was the third largest classification society in the world, a non- governmental and non-profit-making entity whose purposes included "the improvement and development of various matters relating to ships . . . so as to safeguard the safety of life and property at sea".
To determine whether a defendant owed a duty of care, it was now settled law that the elements of foreseeability and proximity as well as considerations of fairness, justice and reasonableness were relevant to all cases whatever the nature of the harm sustained by the plaintiff: see Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office  AC 1004 at 1077D-E. The three requirements for a duty of care were not to be treated as wholly separate and distinct requirements but rather as con- venient and helpful approaches to the pragmatic question whether a duty should be imposed in the circumstances of any given case.
Here, the ship owners were primarily responsible for the vessel sailing in a seaworthy condition. The role of NKK was subsidiary. The NKK surveyor's carelessness did not involve the direct infliction of physical damage in the relevant sense.
There was no contract between the cargo owners and NKK. The cargo owners simply relied on the ship owners to keep the vessel seaworthy and look after the cargo. The dealings between ship owners and cargo owners were based on the bill of lading contracts, incorporating the Hague Rules (as scheduled to the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971) and tonnage limitation, on which the insurance of international trade depended.
If a duty of care by classification societies to cargo owners was recognised it must have a substantial impact on international trade. The international trade system tended to militate against the recognition of such a claim. In all the circumstances, the recognition of such a duty would be unfair, unjust and unreasonable as against both ship owners and classification societies.
As for cargo owners, the existing system provided them with the protection of the Hague or Hague-Visby Rules. That protection was limited by those rules and by tonnage limitation provisions but any shortfall was readily insurable. The lesser injustice was done by not recognising any duty of care to them.
Lord Lloyd, dissenting, said the overriding consideration in this case was that the cargo owners had suffered physical damage to their cargo and such damage was caused by NKK's surveyor for which NKK was responsible on ordinary principles.
Paul Magrath, Barrister
- 1 Howard Jacobson: Let's see the 'criticism' of Israel for what it really is
- 3 Belgium fan Axelle Despiegelaere lands L'Oreal campaign after World Cup viral photo
- 4 Britney Spears sings 'Alien' without Auto-Tune in embarrassingly brilliant leaked audio clip
- 5 PornHub begs users to stop uploading video clips of Brazil getting beaten 7-1
Game of Thrones author George RR Martin says 'f*** you' to fans who fear he will die before finishing Westeros saga
Instagram of US airport security chiefs: Lipstick knives and IED training kits among items seized
‘Ryan Gosling got someone pregnant and it's not me. Brazil you think you’re devastated…’
Israel-Palestine crisis: ‘We just want it to end… We don’t deserve to live like this’
Israel-Palestine crisis: Eight killed in Gaza Strip cafe while watching World Cup semi-final
Sustained immigration has not harmed Britons' employment, say government advisers
Australia facing international condemnation after turning around Sri Lankans at sea
7/7 memorial defaced on anniversary of 2005 attacks with ‘Blair lied thousands died’ graffiti
Even when it brutalises one of its own teenage citizens, America is helpless against Israel
There’s a nasty smell in the political air – and it’s coming from the Tories
Vanessa Feltz criticises 'vile' reaction to Rolf Harris allegations
£24000 - £33600 per annum + pre 12 week AWR : Randstad Education Manchester Se...
On Application: Council of Europe: The European Court of Human Rights’s judgme...
£28000 - £32000 per annum: Charter Selection: A professional services company ...
£400 - £450 per day: Orgtel: Project Manager (PM), Key Banking Client, Retail ...