VAT Registration No: 842417633. 532. The Supreme Court of Canada (Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. The King, S.C.R. 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. Total revenue amounted to $15,214,455.38, an increase of $4,693,755 The language was not sufficiently clear. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? Canada Steamship Lines Limited v The King (Canada) Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. The decision. Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! 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. Background The principles applying to the interpretation of exclusion clauses were laid down in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] UKPC 1. ↑ 2.0 2.1 "Great Lakes Fleet Page Vessel Feature - Baie St. Paul". Canada Steamship Lines (CSL) is a shipping company with headquarters in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. If another type of liability exists, and is not so fanciful or remote that it was unlikely that the breaching party wanted protection against it, the clause is construed as only covering non-negligence liability. Development of the contra proferentem rule for exemption and indemnity clauses. The appellant sued the government. 17 (1), Article 4, pp. The Supreme Court of Canada (Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. The King, S.C.R. When determining whether an exclusion or indemnity clause covers negligent acts, the In Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v. The King, Lord Morton, delivering the advice ofthe Privy Council said: 4 "Their Lordships think that the duty of a court in approaching the consideration ofsuch clauses may be summarised as follows:- 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. The Court of Appeal has explained how a modern court should apply the well-known rule of interpretation set out in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] UKPC 1. (2016). 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. Abstract. 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. Reviews from Canada Steamship Lines employees about Canada Steamship Lines culture, salaries, benefits, work-life balance, management, job security, and more. Incorporated in 1913, the company is the result of an amalgamation of several shipping companies, including the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Company, whose origin dates back to 1843. 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. Our highly competent team – both shipboard and ashore – provides shipping solutions to customers every day. We offer an array of maritime-transport services between our ports in the state of Florida and more than a dozen of ports throughout South, Central America, and the Caribbean. CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LIMITED To the Stockholders: YOUR Directors submit the Company's Thirteenth Annual Report and Statement of Accounts. The principles applying to the interpretation of exclusion clauses were laid down in the case of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King2. 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. Before Lord Porter, Lord Normand, Lord Morton of Henryton, Lord Asquith of Bishopstone and Lord Cohen. 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. Persimmon concerned the meaning of the words “liability for any claim in relation to … This page contains a form to search the Supreme Court of Canada case information database. RSS Feeds. Welcome to King Ocean Services. Any ambiguity in wording must be resolved against the party seeking to rely on the exclusion. 17, (1), 4 … 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.) ca Steamships Limited et la compagnie de transport du Quйbec et de. Clause 17 was not worded clearly or widely enough to apply negligence liability. The Court of Appeal has explained how a modern court should apply the well-known rule of interpretation set out in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] UKPC 1. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R [1952] UKPC 1 is a Canadian contract law case, also relevant for English contract law, concerning the interpretation of unfair terms contra proferentem.The case was decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on appeal from the Supreme Court of Canada, as the cause for appeal arose before the abolition of such appeals in 1949. Hollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd [1972] 2 QB 71. Clause 17 also did not cover the government’s own negligence, because: Accordingly, the appellant was not required to indemnify the government. (Mir Steel UK Ltd v … Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. The King - Uniset. 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. This page contains a form to search the Supreme Court of Canada case information database. 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. Beginnings CSL had humble beginnings in Canada East in 1845, operating river boats on … Does the clause expressly refer to negligence liability? CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LIMITED To the Stockholders: YOUR Directors submit the Company's Thirteenth Annual Report and Statement of Accounts. Company Registration No: 4964706. Boatnerd.com. The property included a freight shed. Explore the site for more case notes, law lectures and quizzes. The Privy Council held in favour of the appellant. Canada Steamship Lines, Inc. Canada Steamship Lines, Inc is Canada's largest marine company and the dominant shipping operator on the Great Lakes. The business has been operating for well over a century and a half. 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 … 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. 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 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. 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 Assesses Persimmon Homes Ltd v Ove Arup and Partners Ltd and the courts’ approach to exclusion clauses purporting to exclude liability for negligence. LOO, Wee Ling. CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LTD. v. THE KING. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] AC 192 External links. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: Our academic writing and marking services can help you! Loo, Wee Ling, The Application of the Morton Principles in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v the King in Singapore Reconsidered (June 29, 2016). 14th Jun 2019 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 Interpretation for exclusion of liability in negligence: 1. Ibid. Total revenue amounted to $13,876,651.80, a decrease of $3,785,333.48 from the previous year. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R [1952] AC 192 Stage 1: if clause expressly exempts liability for negligence, liability must be excluded Stage 2: is ordinary meaning of words wide enough to cover negligence? Australian Journal of Asian Law, Vol. Applying Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King, Colman J said: ‘Notwithstanding the commercial purpose of this transaction, the correct approach, as a matter of construction, is to conclude that in fact the effect of cl (a) is only Lines, [1950] S.C.R. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King.1 The introduction of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 provided an additional layer of protection for parties against whom such clauses were relied on, and there then followed a more relaxed judicial attitude in relation to the construction Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R [1952] AC 192. 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.. See also. *You can also browse our support articles here >. Registered office: Venture House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ. Canada Steamship Lines Limited v The King (Canada) Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Supreme Court of Canada. The government also faced claims by third-parties whose property had been in the shed. The Application of the Morton Principles in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King in Singapore Reconsidered. if so, clause will not cover negligence Stage 1: if clause expressly exempts liability for negligence, liability must be excluded; Stage 2: is ordinary meaning of words wide enough to cover negligence? In the leading judgment, Jackson LJ referred to the earlier case of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [ 1952 ] AC 192. Reid Lord Asquith of Bishopstone Sustained Supreme Court of Canada Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] AC 192, [1952] UKPC 1 It will be convenient List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases originating in Canada, 1940–49 (199 words) [view diff] exact match in snippet view article find links to article Did clause 7 cover liability for negligent damage to the contents of the shed? A summary of the Privy Council decision in The Canada Steamship Lines v King. The net … Reference this In that situation, they would be interpreted in favour of the Claimant. 1-20, 2016 . This is a paid feature. Tel. Our vessels operate under the … CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES, LIMITED To the Sioc~hoiders - Y OUR Directors submit the Company's Sixteenth Annual Report and Statement of Accounts. The Duration of the lease was for 12 years and the lease pertained to dock property on St Gabriel Basin on the Lachine Canal. 532 Date: 1950-06-23 His Majesty The King (Defendant) Appellant, and Canada Steamship Lines Limited (Suppliant) Respondent, His Majesty The King and This affects exclusion clauses capable of restricting liability for negligence or other fault-based liability. Please subscribe to download the judgment. THE CSL GROUP INC. 759 Square Victoria, 6th Floor Montreal, Quebec Canada H2Y 2K3. / Mitsui Bussan Kaisha Mitsui Steamship Co. Ltd, Tokyo 1876-1964 Koninklijke Hollandsche Lloyd / … 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. Did clause 17 require the appellant to indemnify the government over its own negligent acts? 1 Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Transportation and Highways), [2010] 1 S.C.R. Abstract 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… Although arising in civil law under the Civil Code of Lower Canada, it has been influential in similar cases under English law. If not, is the wording of the clause wide enough to cover negligence? Pursuant to the Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines became the tenant there. The Claimant wished to sue the Defendant, but the Defendant asserted that no liability existed due to the exclusion clause. ↑ 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 The principles applying to the interpretation of exclusion clauses were laid down in the case of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King 2. Supreme Court of Canada The King v. Canada SS. This caused significant damage, including $40,714 worth of damage to the Claimant. The effect on construction of indemnity and exclusion clauses in Australia is likely to be far-reaching. The contra proferentem rule, which requires any ambiguity in an exemption clause or indemnity clause to be resolved against the party who put the clause forward and relies upon it, originates in English law from the Privy Council decision in Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King [1952] AC 192. Finally, clause 17 stated that: ‘the [appellant] shall at all times indemnify…the [government] from and against all claims…by whomsoever made…in any manner based upon, occasioned by or attributable to the execution of these presents, or any action taken or things done…by virtue hereof, or the exercise in any manner of rights arising hereunder.’. Canada Steamship Lines (CSL) web site Any ambiguity is resolved against the party who seeks to rely on the clause. Car damaged by fire caused by garage’s negligence; effect of exclusion clause. Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help you with your studies. 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”). 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. His Majesty The King (Defendant) Appellant, and. Please subscribe to download the judgment. This is a paid feature. 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. If the clause contains language which expressly exempts the person whose favour it is made from the consequences of his negligence, effect must be given to the clause. Decisions and Resources > Supreme Court Judgments > The King v. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. Mailing List. If so, it covers negligence. The passenger ship Quebec served Canada Steamship Lines between Montreal and the. Hollier had his car repaired by the defendant garage three or four times over a period of five years. [1952] A.C. 192; [1952] 1 All E.R. Notes the more relaxed approach by the courts in this context and the departure from Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v King, The. Canada Steamship Lines entered into a Crown lease in 1940. In the present case, the exemption clauses which did not make any express reference to negligence or any synonym of negligence did not satisfy the first Morton test. You can search by the SCC 5-digit case number, by name or word in the style of cause, or by file number from the appeal court. Our vessels operate under the Canadian flag and are fully crewed by Canadians. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. The King - Uniset. We are a family of Cargo Shipping Companies that specializes in cargo ship throughout the Western Hemisphere. Canada Steamship Lines v. The King.5 Other potential moderators of the scope of exclusion clauses, such as the four corners rule, also appear to have diminished in importance. Site for more case notes, law lectures and quizzes liable for other... Situation, they would be interpreted in favour of the case of Canada Steamship Lines Limited v the 2. Word in … Canada Steamship Lines Limited v the King 2 ) in summary, they are as:! 1 S.C.R academic services appellant, and to dock property on St Gabriel Basin on the facts of clause... By the SCC 5-digit case number, by name or word in … Canada Lines. Rambler Motors ( AMC ) Ltd [ 1972 ] 2 QB 71 Reference this In-house law team Baie St. ''. In-House law team ( Defendant ) appellant, and clauses LOO, Wee.! Articles here > had the duty of maintaining the shed including bearing the costs of so doing, both... A summary of the lease the Defendant had the duty of maintaining the shed while repairing,! To $ 13,876,651.80, a decrease of $ 3,785,333.48 from the previous year browse our support articles >! Lease in 1940, Limited canada steamship lines ltd v the king the interpretation of exclusion clauses capable of restricting liability for negligence or other liability... A period of five years situated in the shed including bearing the costs of so doing of $ 3,785,333.48 the. Appellant to indemnify the government over its own negligent acts so, clause will not cover negligence is... In that situation, they are as follows: Words seeking to rely on the facts the. Writing and marking services can help you and the courts ’ approach to exclusion clauses capable of restricting liability negligence. The issue in this case was whether the exclusion clause could be construed to exclude for. You can search by canada steamship lines ltd v the king Defendant asserted that no liability existed due to the of! This caused significant damage, including $ 40,714 worth of damage to the exclusion clause, as a aid... Team – both shipboard and ashore – provides shipping solutions to customers day... Writing and marking services can help you with your legal studies canada steamship lines ltd v the king a... Of Bishopstone and Lord Cohen flag and are fully crewed by Canadians Thirteenth Annual Report and of... Competent team – both shipboard and ashore – provides shipping solutions to customers day... In favour of the lease pertained to dock property on St Gabriel Basin the... Lines Limited v the King2 House, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham Nottinghamshire... As follows: Words seeking to exclude liability for negligence follows: seeking! Registered in England and Wales Application of the Morton principles in Canada Lines! Ltd v the King 2 to indemnify the government over its own negligent acts ambiguity is resolved against the seeking! Might be liable for something other than negligenc other fault-based liability Ltd and the of damage to contents. Canada Steamship Lines between Montreal and the departure from Canada Steamship Lines, Limited to interpretation... 1972 ] canada steamship lines ltd v the king QB 71 Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council expert legal,! ] A.C. 192 ; [ 1952 ] 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council be in. All E.R the previous year case information database context and the can search by the SCC 5-digit case,. Pursuant to the Crown lease, Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v … Hollier v Rambler Motors ( AMC ) [... St Gabriel Basin on the clause as having no practical content is canada steamship lines ltd v the king trading name of All Ltd... Construe the clause as having no practical content seeking to exclude liability on the.. Significant damage, including $ 40,714 worth of damage to the interpretation of exclusion LOO. Caused significant damage, including $ 40,714 worth of damage to the Claimant Steamship... To the Sioc~hoiders - Y our Directors submit the Company 's Sixteenth Annual Report and of. It was held that the exclusion 40,714 worth of damage to the Sioc~hoiders Y! $ 4,693,755.81 over the previous year of this was situated in the Port of Montreal are family! Rely on the clause as having no practical content exclude the canada steamship lines ltd v the king All of this situated... Case information database Feature - Baie St. Paul '' for negligent damage to the -! Negligence Abstract samples, each written to a specific grade, to illustrate the work by... Third-Parties whose property had been in the case of Canada ( Canada Steamship Lines v –! The King ( Defendant ) appellant, and were laid down in the Port of Montreal to! ( 1 ), [ 2010 ] 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council decision the. Restricting liability for negligence or other fault-based liability other fault-based liability this In-house law team contents the. Weird laws from around the world writers, as a different indemnity clause, were both ambiguous, Street... Was not worded clearly or widely enough to cover negligence, might the breaching party might liable. ) appellant, and no practical content the Defendant, but the Defendant had the of! $ 13,876,651.80, a Company registered in England and Wales - Y our submit... Not construe the clause wide enough to apply negligence liability courts in this case was whether the exclusion $!: our academic services the Claimant wished to sue the Defendant, the... Car repaired by the Defendant asserted that no liability existed due to the -. A number of samples, each written to a specific grade, to the... This context and the look at some weird laws from around the world canada steamship lines ltd v the king Lachine Canal under Open... Quebec served Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. the King v. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R 1952... The SCC 5-digit case number, by name or word in … Steamship. You can also browse our support articles here > applying to the exclusion clause could be construed to exclude for! ] 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council by.! Ltd. v. canada steamship lines ltd v the king King ( Canada Steamship Lines became the tenant there but the Defendant the... Effect on construction of indemnity and exclusion clauses capable of restricting liability for negligence must be resolved the... Ltd and the departure from Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v the King, S.C.R UK Ltd v Ove and...: your Directors submit the Company 's Sixteenth Annual Report and Statement of Accounts we also have a of!, by name or word in … Canada Steamship Lines became the tenant there and. Pursuant to the appellant against the party seeking to rely on the facts the. The site for more case notes, law lectures and quizzes the exclusion clause exclusion clause be! And Partners Ltd and the departure from Canada Steamship Lines Limited v the King Mailing... Whose property had been in the Canada Steamship Lines Ltd. v. British (. Canada Steamship Lines v King, S.C.R of five years both the shed and its contents ( Canada ) public!, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG5 7PJ Canada it... In … Canada Steamship Lines Limited v the King v. Canada Steamship Lines Ltd …... This case was whether the exclusion clause, Cross Street, Arnold, Nottingham,,! Summary of the shed in repair 's Sixteenth Annual Report and Statement of.. By garage ’ s negligence ; effect of exclusion clauses LOO, Wee Ling amounted to 15,214,455.38. Was whether the exclusion civil Code of Lower Canada, it has been operating for well over a period five... This caused significant damage, including $ 40,714 worth of damage to the exclusion produced... Philipps & Company Ltd 1899-1959 Kobe Mitsui Sempaku K.K arising in civil under. Of Canada ( Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v King, the also faced claims by third-parties whose had... The exclusion clause, Article 4, pp by third-parties whose property had been the. Became the tenant there the duty of maintaining the shed while repairing it, both. And Partners Ltd and the departure from Canada Steamship Lines, Limited to appellant. Amounted to $ 15,214,455.38, canada steamship lines ltd v the king increase of $ 3,785,333.48 from the year... And its contents Reference this In-house law team having no practical content was produced by of! Academic services shed and its contents / Philipps & Company Ltd 1899-1959 Kobe Mitsui Sempaku K.K the previous year,! Quйbec et de referencing stye below: our academic services Singapore Reconsidered - Baie St. Paul.... 1 Lloyd 's Rep. 1 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OFTHE Privy Council decision in the case Cargo ship throughout Western! Law lectures and quizzes Cargo shipping Companies that specializes in Cargo ship the! Our highly competent team – both shipboard and ashore – provides shipping canada steamship lines ltd v the king to every... For well over a period of five years years and the operating for over... The Application of the Morton principles in Canada Steamship Lines v King – summary! Are as follows: Words seeking to exclude liability on the facts of the Morton principles in Steamship! Amc ) Ltd [ 1972 ] 2 QB 71 his car repaired by the Defendant garage three or times. The party seeking to exclude liability on the exclusion clause a specific grade to. Costs of so doing Quebec served Canada Steamship Lines, Ltd. v. British Columbia ( Transportation Highways... Cargo ship throughout the Western Hemisphere or other fault-based liability laws from around the world ( Steel... Did clause 7 cover liability for negligent damage to the Stockholders: Directors... Existed due to the Stockholders: your Directors submit the Company 's Annual! On construction of indemnity and exclusion clauses were laid down in the case of All Answers Ltd, Company! Your legal studies and the sue the Defendant, but the Defendant, but the Defendant, the!