| Venue: | KB |
| Facts: | Stevedores are negligently loading benzine into a ship. One board falls. Kablooey. Fire wrecks the ship. The stevedores were employed by folks who had chartered the boat from the owners. Since when do falling boards cause fires? |
| Posture: | In arbitration, the panel finds that the spark was not a foreseeable consequence of the barrel falling, although some damages might be expected. Damages set at 200K pounds. Arbitrators decided that the owners were entitled to recover the full losses, subject to the court's approval. The court must use the facts as found at arbitration. Appealed, it seems, bu the charterers. |
| Issue: | Does it matter whether the spark was foreseeable? |
| Holding: | No. Appeal is dismissed. |
| Rule: | If you have a breach of duty constituting negligence, and damage as a direct result, what the negligent person foresaw is irrelevant. |
| Reasoning: | If you know your negligence might produce damage, you can't get yourself
out of trouble just by thinking it would be less bad than it
actually turns out to be.
The question isn't whether this harm was foreseeable, it's just whether harm was foreseeable. If you've got a negligent act, the fact that the damage takes an unexpected turn isn't any excuse. |
| Dicta: | |