(Outer House) The pursuers alleged that the defendant service company was responsible in negligence for damage by fire to its oil rig supply vessel. It was said that oil they had failed to clear was released by piping when opened flowing onto a hot engine and igniting. The defenders sought contributions from the pursuers for the failings of its own employees, and from third party charterparties.
Held: After a debate on the assumed facts, Lord Ordinary, Lord Hodge, held that Enviroco was not entitled to a contribution from Asco.
 ScotCS CSOH – 63, 2008 GWD 14-267,  CSOH 63, 2008 SLT 703
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1940 3(2)
Cited – Beedie v Norrie 1966
Chapter 26 of the Rules of the Court of Session 1994, which is headed Third Party Procedure, enables questions arising out of claims by a defender against a third party for contribution, relief or indemnity and liability to be disposed of in the . .
Cited – Singer v Gray Tool Co (Europe) Ltd 1984
Cited – Dormer v Melville Dundas and Whitson Ltd 1990
Cited – Taft v Clyde Marine Motoring Co Ltd 1990
Appeal from – Farstad Supply AS v Enviroco Ltd and Another SCS 1-May-2009
See also – Enviroco Ltd v Farstad Supply A/S ChD 22-May-2009
See Also – Enviroco Ltd v Farstad Supply A/S CA 18-Dec-2009
A company which would otherwise undoubtedly be the subsidiary of another company ceased to be so when the shares in the former company were charged by the latter company to a Scottish bank. . .
See also – Farstad Supply As v Enviroco Ltd SC 5-May-2010
The defendants (E) were liable to F after a serious offshore accident, but sought a contribution from a third party (A), the main charterers, seeking to rely on section 3(2) o the 1940 Act saying that ‘if sued they might have been liable’. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.267128