Angeliki Compania Maritima S.A. v. Montreal Ship Repairs Ltd. and BP Oil Ltd., (1974) 6 N.R. 216 (FCA)

• Judge: Jackett, C.J., Hyde, D.J. and Choquette, D.J.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: October 23, 1974
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1974), 6 N.R. 216 (FCA)

Angeliki Compania v. Mtrl. Ship Repairs (1974), 6 N.R. 216 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Angeliki Compania Maritima S.A. v. Montreal Ship Repairs Ltd. and Bp Oil Ltd.

Indexed As: Angeliki Compania Maritima S.A. v. Montreal Ship Repairs Ltd. and BP Oil Ltd.

Federal Court of Appeal

Jackett, C.J., Hyde, D.J. and Choquette, D.J.

October 23, 1974.

Summary:

This case arose out of a claim for damages arising out of a fire on the plaintiff's ship. The plaintiff's ship was moored at a pier in the Montreal harbour. A nearby oil tanker discharged ballast into the water which contained oil. A welder working on the side of the plaintiff's ship did not see the oil on the water and the welder dropped bits of molten metal which set the oil on fire. The fire engulfed the plaintiff's ship. By agreement of the parties the plaintiff's claim was to be disposed of in accordance with the Quebec Civil Code and not in accordance with the rules of admiralty law - see paragraph 12. The trial court allowed the plaintiff's action and held the defendant oil company 85% at fault and the defendant welder 15% at fault.

On appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the trial court was affirmed. The Federal Court of Appeal stated that the oil tanker was at fault for creating a dangerous situation and the welder was at fault for being inattentive and failing to see the oil on the water.

Torts - Topic 4626

Dangerous activities - Creation of dangerous situations - Escape of flammable material - An oil tanker discharged ballast containing oil into the Montreal harbour - A welder working on the side of a nearby ship did not see the oil in the water - The welder dropped bits of molten metal into the water which set the oil on fire and resulted in damage to the plaintiff's ship - The Federal Court of Appeal allowed the plaintiff's action and held the oil tanker 85% at fault and the welder 15% at fault - The Federal Court of Appeal stated that the oil tanker was at fault for creating a dangerous situation and the welder was at fault for being inattentive and failing to see the oil on the water.

Cases Noticed:

Deguire Avenue Ltd. v. Adler, [1963] Q.B. 101, folld. [para. 23].

Grand Trunk Ry. and City of Montreal v. McDonald (1919), 57 S.C.R. 268, folld. [para. 23].

Napierville Junction Ry. Co. v. Dubois, [1924] S.C.R. 375, folld. [para. 23].

Counsel:

P.G. Cote, for BP Oil Limited and BP Refinery Canada Ltd.;

E.L. Clark, for Montreal Ship Repairs Limited;

T.H. Bishop, for Angeliki Compania Maritima S.A.;

C. Ruelland, for National Harbours Board.

This appeal was heard by the Federal Court of Appeal at Montreal, Quebec on October 22 and 23, 1974. Judgment was delivered by the Federal Court of Appeal on October 23, 1974.

The judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal was delivered by HYDE, D.J.