Pope & Talbot v. The Pacific

Citations

• 3 D. Haw. 201

Syllabus

<p>Act of navigation — Signalling by a dredger in a 'fixed position: A dredger at work in a fixed position in a ship channel, signals, in answer to the inquiring signal of an approaching tug with its tow, that a certain side of the channel is open for her to pass, the tug attempts the passage and its tow is stranded. Held, that such signalling by the dredger was not an act of navigation that rendered it liable to attachment.</p> <p>Admiralty jurisdiction — Damage received by a ship in charge of a tug: Held, under the circumstances set forth above, followed by a second stranding of the tow while in charge of the tug, that an action lies in admiralty against such tug.</p> <p>Liability of tug for injury to its tow under signal to proceed: Under the first mentioned circumstances, a tug is not relieved of responsibility because of a signal favorable to her proceeding through the passage indicated.</p> <p>Liability for secondary consecjuences of a negligent act — Interruption: Liability for secondary consequences of a negligent act is relieved by the interposition of a second negligent act or overpowering force.</p> <p>■An act of necessity justifiable: A necessary act is not a negligent act unless it is negligently done.</p> <p>General allegation of negligence — Emergency: A. mere general allegation of negligence insufficient where a necessary act is attempted and fails under conditions likely to cause failure, even though proper care and skill is exercised.</p>