Case Number

CA 4530/91

Date Decided

10-10-2000

Decision Type

Appellate

Document Type

Full Opinion

Abstract

Facts: The present case raises the question of liability for damage caused during the course of pilotage of a ship. A ship and a dock were damaged during the course of the pilotage of a ship in the dock. The owner of the Ship, Zim Integrated Shipping Services, Ltd. repaired the damage that was caused to the Ship, and demanded that the Ports and Railways Authority reimburse it for the cost of the repair. The owner based the demand on the negligence of the Ports and Railways Authority and the negligence of the pilot for whose actions it was claimed the Ports and Railways Authority bore vicarious liability. The two central questions that were addressed were: do the owners of a ship have a cause of action against the employer of a pilot who caused damage to a ship in the course of piloting in the area of a port? And, if so, how is the liability to be distributed between the owners of the ship and the pilot’s employer if the damage was caused by the joint fault of the pilot and the ship’s crew. The District Court imposed two thirds of the liability for the damage on the pilot, and the remaining third on the captain. The court, based on vicarious liability attributed the liability of the pilot to the Ports and Railways Authority and the liability of the captain to Zim. The practical ramification of this distribution is that Zim’s suit against the Ports and Railways Authority was successful only in part and the Ports and Railways Authority was required to pay Zim two thirds of the cost of repair of the ship. The Ports and Railways Authority appealed this decision.

Held: The Court partially allowed the respondent’s appeal. The court determined that the Ports and Railways Authority alone is liable to Zim by way of vicarious liability for the pilot’s negligence. However, the pilot, were he to be sued to compensate Zim for the damage caused to the Ship, would only be obligated, given the contributory negligence of the captain, for half the damage. Therefore, the Ports and Railways Authority is only obligated to compensate Zim for half of the damage. The appellants were ordered to pay the respondent’s fees in the sum of NIS 30,000.

Keywords

Torts -- Compensation, Torts -- Fault, Torts -- Negligence

Included in

Torts Commons

Share

COinS