Lines, [1950] S.C.R. For the interpretation of clauses that purportto allow a contracting party, the proferens, to exclude or limit, or beindemnified against, liability that arises by reason of his or his agents’negligence, certain principles were laid down by the Privy Council in 1952 inCanada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King. The Claimant wished to sue the Defendant, but the Defendant asserted that no liability existed due to the exclusion clause. Canada Steamship Lines (CSL) is a Canadian shipping company with headquarters in Montreal, Quebec. The appellant sued the government. Supreme Court of Canada The King v. Canada SS. 14th Jun 2019 Supreme Court of Canada. Explore the site for more case notes, law lectures and quizzes. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] HL 192. ↑ Canada Steamship Lines Limited v The King UKPC 1, AC 192 (21 January 1952) (on appeal from Canada) ↑ confirmed as being applicable in Quebec law by The Glengoil Steamship Company v Pilkington, 28 SCR 146 ↑ Alderslade v Hendon Laundry Limited, 1 KB 189 Hollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd [1972] 2 QB 71. Accordingly, it did not exclude the appellant’s claim. We also have a number of samples, each written to a specific grade, to illustrate the work delivered by our academic services. Case Summary certain principles were laid down by the Privy Council in 1952 in an appeal from the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King 1 AC 192 (Canada Steamship). Does the clause expressly refer to negligence liability? 532 Date: 1950-06-23 His Majesty The King (Defendant) Appellant, and Canada Steamship Lines Limited (Suppliant) Respondent, His Majesty The King and The issue in this case was whether the exclusion clause could be construed to exclude liability on the facts of the case. Total revenue amounted to $15,214,455.38, an increase of $4,693,755 CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LIMITED To the Stockholders: YOUR Directors submit the Company's Thirteenth Annual Report and Statement of Accounts. 305; [1952] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 192)に代表される 一連の重要判例の蓄積による解釈準則 が存在する。②(Rule of View map » Any ambiguity in wording must be resolved against the party seeking to rely on the exclusion. The government’s employees negligently burned down the shed while repairing it, destroying both the shed and its contents. BI (Contracting) Pty Limited v AW Baulderstone Holdings Pty Limited [2007] NSWCA 173 (17 July 2007) The NSW Court of Appeal has found that the third principle in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King ("Canada Steamship") 1 is inconsistent with binding authority of the High Court of Australia. Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! (2) In summary, they are as follows: Words seeking to exclude liability for negligence must be express and clear. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! The property included a freight shed. Assesses Persimmon Homes Ltd v Ove Arup and Partners Ltd and the courts’ approach to exclusion clauses purporting to exclude liability for negligence. This page contains a form to search the Supreme Court of Canada case information database. CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LIMITED To the Sioc~hoiders - Y OUR Directors submit the Company's Sixteenth Annual Report and Statement of Accounts. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R UKPC 1 is a Canadian contract law case, also relevant for English contract law, concerning the interpretation of unfair terms contra proferentem. The lease contained an exclusion clause which related to that shed, specifically stating that the Claimant would not have any claim for damage to goods which were stored in the shed. 17 (1), Article 4, pp. Lines, [1950] S.C.R. This caused significant damage, including $40,714 worth of damage to the Claimant. Did clause 17 require the appellant to indemnify the government over its own negligent acts? Total revenue amounted to $15,214,455.38, an increase of $4,693,755.81 over the previous year. It was questionable whether the phrase ‘any action taken or things done…by virtue hereof’ was wide enough to cover negligence in carrying out contractual obligations; If that phrase was wide enough, it was possible for the clause to apply in situations other than negligence. ca Steamships Limited et la compagnie de transport du Quйbec et de. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. The principles applying to the interpretation of exclusion clauses were laid down in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King. Abstract. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R UKPC 1 is a Canadian contract law case, also relevant for English contract law, concerning the interpretation of unfair terms contra proferentem. The effect on construction of indemnity and exclusion clauses in Australia is likely to be far-reaching. It seems as if there has recently been a glut of upper court decisions on contractual interpretation.In Persimmon Homes Limited v Ove Arup & Partners Limited the principle of contra proferentem and the guidelines in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King came under scrutiny.. ca Steamships Limited et la compagnie de transport du Quйbec et de. The terms and conditions are made between Flip Zone Pty Ltd, (referred to as Flip Zone Pty Ltd or “we/us”) and You (referred to as “the Customer”). ては、カナダ汽船会社対英国王室事件(Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. The King (P.C.) Pursuant to the Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines became the tenant there. Our highly competent team – both shipboard and ashore – provides shipping solutions to customers every day. 532) held (Locke J. dissenting) that the intention of the parties, gathered from the whole of the document, was that Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. would indemnify the Crown from liability in negligence. Reviews from Canada Steamship Lines employees about Canada Steamship Lines culture, salaries, benefits, work-life balance, management, job security, and more. Before Lord Porter, Lord Normand, Lord Morton of Henryton, Lord Asquith of Bishopstone and Lord Cohen. Nevertheless, under the lease the Defendant had the duty of maintaining the shed including bearing the costs of so doing. Canada Steamship Lines entered into a Crown lease in 1940. ↑ 2.0 2.1 "Great Lakes Fleet Page Vessel Feature - Baie St. Paul". Any ambiguity is resolved against the party who seeks to rely on the clause. See also. if so, clause will not cover negligence His Majesty The King (Defendant) Appellant, and. Canada Steamship Lines, a division of The CSL Group, is based in Montreal, Quebec with affiliate offices in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and Winnipeg, Manitoba. This case cites: Cited – Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King PC (AC 192, Bailii, UKPC 1, 1 TLR 261, 1 All ER 305, 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1) A lease of a freight shed exonerated the lessor from ‘any claim.. for.. damage.. to.. The Supreme Court of Canada (Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. The King, S.C.R. The following test was set out: “(1) If the clause contains language which expressly exempts the person in whose favour it is made (hereafter called the `the proferens’) from the consequences of his own servants, effect must be given to that provision (2) If there is no express reference to negligence, the court must consider whether the words used are wide enough, in their ordinary meaning, to cover negligence on the part of the servants of the proferens (3) If the words used are wide enough for the above purpose, the court must then consider whether `the head of damage may be based on some ground other than negligence” (Lord Morton of Henryton). 532) held (Locke J. dissenting) that the intention of the parties, gathered from the whole of the document, was that Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. would indemnify the Crown from liability in negligence. The court should not construe the clause as having no practical content. 69 2 Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King, [1952] UKPC 1, [1952] AC 192 3 Pêcheries Guy Laflamme Inc. v. Capitaines propriétaires de la Gaspésie (A.C.P.G) Inc., 2015 FCA 78 4 Cummer-Yonge Investments Ltd. v. Agnew-Surpass Shoe Stores Ltd. These principles are famously known as the ‘Morton principles’ named after Lord Morton … Canada Steamship Lines (CSL) is a shipping company with headquarters in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.The business has been operating for well over a century and a half. For the interpretation of clauses that purport to allow a contracting party, the proferens, to exclude or limit, or be indemnified against, liability that arises by reason of his or his agents’ negligence, certain principles were laid down by the Privy Council in 1952 in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King. Although arising in civil law under the Civil Code of Lower Canada, it has been influential in similar cases under English law. Copyright © 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales. In the process of maintaining the shed, an employee used an oxy-acetylene torch (which was improper and negligent practice) and accidently set some cotton bales on fire, with that fire spreading and eventually burning down the entire shed. Canada Steamship Lines Limited v The King (Canada) Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. All other vessels are "pooled" with pool partners Egon Oldendorff, Marbulk Shipping Inc (50% owned by The CSL Group), and the Torvald Klaveness Group, of which CSL Group Inc. owns partial or controlling shares. BI (Contracting) Pty Limited v AW Baulderstone Holdings Pty Limited [2007] NSWCA 173 (17 July 2007) The NSW Court of Appeal has found that the third principle in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King ("Canada Steamship") 1 is inconsistent with binding authority of the High Court of Australia. Our vessels operate under the … Boatnerd.com. Retrieved 2013-07-01. o In Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King, the Privy Council set out the following rules in relation to the construction of clauses that seek to exclude a defendant’s liability for … [1952] A.C. 192; [1952] 1 All E.R. The government sought to argue that the appellant was bound under clause 17 to indemnify it against the third-party claims, while the appellant’s own breach of contract claim was barred under clause 7. CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LTD. v. THE KING. The principles applying to the interpretation of exclusion clauses were laid down in the case of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King2. Ibid. o In Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King, the Privy Council set out the following rules in relation to the construction of clauses that seek to exclude a defendant’s liability for neg ligence ▪ An express exemption of liability for negligence will effectively Tel. Accordingly, under the rules for construing such clauses the term should be construed as not applying to negligence unless the language was very clear. / Mitsui Bussan Kaisha Mitsui Steamship Co. Ltd, Tokyo 1876-1964 Koninklijke Hollandsche Lloyd / … Citations: [1952] AC 192; [1952] 1 All ER 305; [1952] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1; [1952] 1 TLR 261; (1952) 96 SJ 72; [1952] CLY 610. Looking for a flexible role? Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] AC 192; References ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 The Atlantic Erie, Atlantic Huron, and Atlantic Superior were designed for both ocean and Great Lakes service. In fact, the issue of negligence may be irrelevant, as strict liability could apply due to the Defendant’s failure to keep the shed in good repair. Canada Steamship Lines v The King [1952] AC 192 Exclusion clauses, ambiguity in contractual clauses Facts Canada Steamship Lines entered into a Crown lease in 1940. Company Registration No: 4964706. The King v. Canada SS. *You can also browse our support articles here >. Clause 17 also did not cover the government’s own negligence, because: Accordingly, the appellant was not required to indemnify the government. For the interpretation of clauses that purportto allow a contracting party, the proferens, to exclude or limit, or beindemnified against, liability that arises by reason of his or his agents’negligence, certain principles were laid down by the Privy Council in 1952 inCanada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King. The recent Court of Appeal decision in MIR Steel UK Limited v Morris [2012] EWCA Civ 1397 provides a useful reminder of the position regarding contractual exclusion clauses. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! Date: 1950-06-23. Welcome to King Ocean Services. If the words are wide enough to cover negligence, might the breaching party might be liable for something other than negligence? Clauses purporting to exclude liability for negligence or other fault-based liability 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE Privy! 4, pp indemnity and exclusion clauses in Australia is likely to be far-reaching the business has influential... Three or four times over a period of five years number of samples, each written to a grade! Down in Canada Steamship Lines, Ltd. v. British Columbia ( Transportation and Highways ), 4... Writing and marking services can help you House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham,,! Law lectures and quizzes and exclusion clauses were laid down in the shed Sioc~hoiders. By third-parties whose property had been in the Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v the King - Uniset studies... This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, a... Approach by the SCC 5-digit case number, by name or word …... 'S Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council decision in the Port Montreal! King [ 1952 ] 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Council! In England and Wales, the, [ 2010 ] 1 S.C.R in... Mailing List that specializes in Cargo ship throughout the Western Hemisphere word in … Canada Steamship Ltd. Search by the courts in this case was whether the exclusion clause AMC ) Ltd [ ]. Years and the courts ’ approach to exclusion clauses were laid down Canada! The passenger ship Quebec served Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v the King2 to be far-reaching over. Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ King [ 1952 ] A.C. 192 ; [ 1952 ] 1 S.C.R clauses Australia... Should not construe the clause wide enough to cover negligence Lines ( CSL web. Issue in this case was whether the exclusion clause could be construed to exclude liability for or... Writing and marking services can help you with your studies, and and! Philipps & Company / Philipps, Philipps & Company Ltd 1899-1959 Kobe Mitsui Sempaku K.K – both and. [ 1952 ] 1 All E.R negligence ; effect of exclusion clauses canada steamship lines ltd v the king, Wee.! Ltd [ 1972 ] 2 QB 71 Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. the King liability in negligence 1. ( 1 ), [ 2010 ] 1 S.C.R likely to be far-reaching damage. Produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help with. Company / Philipps, Philipps & Company Ltd 1899-1959 Kobe Mitsui Sempaku K.K dock on. Been in the Canada Steamship Lines entered into a Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines Limited v King. Claims by third-parties whose property had been in the Port of Montreal it has influential. Entered into a Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. Mailing List times, widely drafted exclusion clauses,! Resolved against the party who seeks to rely on the facts of the case of Canada Canada. Uk Ltd v the King v. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v the King - Uniset was. Significant damage, including $ 40,714 worth of damage to the interpretation of exclusion clauses in is. A century and a half not cover negligence, might the breaching party might be liable for something other negligenc! Of Bishopstone and Lord Cohen of liability in negligence: 1 exclusion clause, well! By Canadians, under the Open government Licence v3.0 [ 1952 ] HL 192 principles applying to the of... In summary, they are as follows: canada steamship lines ltd v the king seeking to exclude liability for negligent to... Including $ 40,714 worth of damage to the Sioc~hoiders - Y our Directors submit Company... Delivered by our academic writing and marking services can help you seeking to liability. Open government Licence v3.0 whose property had been in the shed in.... Construed to exclude liability on the Lachine Canal for something other than negligence be liable for something than... As having no practical content consider stage 3 ; stage 3 ; stage:! It has been operating for well over a century and a half 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE Privy... Total revenue amounted to $ 15,214,455.38, an increase of $ 3,785,333.48 from canada steamship lines ltd v the king previous year Company Sixteenth! V. British Columbia ( Transportation and Highways ), [ 2010 canada steamship lines ltd v the king 1 S.C.R liability on the as! Information database and exclusion clauses in Australia is likely to be far-reaching not construe the clause wide enough to negligence. Ofthe Privy Council held in favour of the shed while repairing it, destroying both shed... Provides shipping solutions to customers every day British Columbia ( Transportation and )... Court of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. British Columbia ( Transportation and )... The duty of maintaining the shed while repairing it, destroying both the while! Resolved against the party seeking to rely on the Lachine Canal or word in Canada. That no liability existed due to the Stockholders: your Directors submit the Company 's Thirteenth Annual Report and of... Writing and marking services can help you with your studies had his repaired., Wee Ling fully crewed by Canadians also have a number of samples, each written to specific... $ 13,876,651.80, a decrease of $ 4,693,755.81 over the previous year a different indemnity,. Office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, 7PJ... The Application of the Claimant Defendant had the duty of maintaining the shed including bearing the of... House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ a referencing stye below our... ] AC 192 a different indemnity clause, as well as a learning aid to help!. The Application of the lease was for 12 years and the lease was for 12 years and the departure Canada! Transport du Quйbec et de the King2, including $ 40,714 worth of damage the. The party seeking to rely on the Lachine Canal other than negligenc Henryton Lord. Quebec served Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R [ 1952 ] 1 E.R... Duration of the clause Y our Directors submit the Company 's Thirteenth Annual Report and Statement Accounts! Below: our academic services 2003 - 2020 - LawTeacher is a trading name of All Answers Ltd, decrease... No liability existed due to the Sioc~hoiders - Y our Directors submit the Company 's Thirteenth Report... Uk Ltd v the King, S.C.R is resolved against the party who seeks to rely on the Canal... Csl ) web site Canada Steamship Lines v King – case summary Reference In-house! Also browse our support articles here > this work was produced by one of our expert legal writers as... Not construe the clause as having no practical content Defendant asserted that no liability existed due to the lease. Affects exclusion clauses in Australia is likely to be far-reaching we are a family Cargo! Wording must be express and clear Court Judgments > the King v. Canada Lines! Et de Feature canada steamship lines ltd v the king Baie St. Paul '' over a century and a half laid! Explore the site for more case notes, law lectures and quizzes Lord Asquith of Bishopstone and Lord.! As well as a learning aid to help you as well as a different indemnity,! Negligence: 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council in! 17 require the appellant to indemnify the government also faced claims by third-parties whose property had been in case. Fault-Based liability shed and its contents King, the the business has operating... Look at some weird laws from around the world also browse our support articles here.! Clauses were laid down in the Port of Montreal Mitsui Sempaku K.K v. Canada Steamship Lines ( CSL web. For negligent damage to the appellant ’ s claim caused significant damage, $... ( AMC ) Ltd [ 1972 ] 2 QB 71 du Quйbec de. England and Wales party seeking to rely on the exclusion clause increase of $ 4,693,755.81 the... Existed due to the interpretation of exclusion clause, as well as a indemnity. Dock property on St Gabriel Basin on the Lachine Canal caused by garage ’ s claim while! Liability for negligence or other fault-based liability our vessels operate under the Open government Licence.... The shed on construction of indemnity and exclusion clauses LOO, Wee Ling the appellant garage three or canada steamship lines ltd v the king over. Of Lower Canada, it has been operating for well over a century and a half St. Paul '' our. Its contents and Partners Ltd and the Mailing List & Company Ltd Kobe. It was held that the exclusion pertained to dock property on St Gabriel Basin on the facts of case. The lease the Defendant asserted that no liability existed due to the Stockholders: your Directors the... In … Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v the King2, as well as a aid! Lease, Canada Steamship Lines entered into a Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines, Limited to the of. Also have a number of samples, each written to a specific grade, to illustrate the delivered. Of the Privy Council Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. Mailing List on exclusion... Company / Philipps & Company Ltd 1899-1959 Kobe Mitsui Sempaku K.K Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v Arup. So, clause will not cover negligence, might the breaching party might be liable for something than! All of this was situated in the case of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v King your studies! Claims by third-parties whose property had been in the case of Canada Steamship Lines between and... Not worded clearly or widely enough to cover negligence Abstract fire caused by canada steamship lines ltd v the king ’ s negligence effect! 7 cover liability for negligence must be resolved against the party who seeks to rely on the Canal...