The pursuers reared salmon eggs to the age of two years (smolt), before then selling them on. The defenders caused an oil spill, and the area was designated as an exclusion zone preventing the pursuers continuing their trade and could not sell their smolt save at a much reduced price or not at all.
Held: The liability for damages flowing from an oil spill at sea were limited. These damages were only relational economic loss occurring in the area of the spill.
Judges:
Lord Gill
Citations:
Times 06-Mar-1998, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s LR 552
Statutes:
Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act 1971
Cited by:
Appeal from – Landcatch Limited v The Braer Corporation and Williams and Jones and Hudner and Assurance Foreningen Skuld and the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund IHCS 19-May-1999
The pursuers raised freshwater salmon (smolt) to the age of two before selling them on. An oil spill prevented them trading. They appealed a refusal of damages on the baiss that this was pure relational economic loss.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Cited – D Pride and Partners (A Firm) and Others v Institute for Animal Health and Others QBD 31-Mar-2009
The claimants sought damages after the loss of business when the defendants’ premises were the source of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The organism had escaped from their premises via a broken drain.
Held: Much of the damage claimed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Environment, Scotland
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82941