Topics similar to or like Doughty v Turner Manufacturing. Doughty v Turner Ltd: CA 1964. The evidence showed that splashes caused by sudden immersion, whether of the metal objects for which it was intended or any other extraneous object, were a foreseeable danger which should be carefully avoided. I do not think that this authority assists him. It was, however, argued by Mr James for the Appellant that, even though the risk of explosion upon immersion of the cover was not one which the Defendants could reasonably foresee, the Plaintiff can, nevertheless, recover because one of the Defendants' servants inadvertently either knocked the cover into the liquid or allowed it to slip in, thus giving rise to a foreseeable risk of splashing the hot liquid on to the Plaintiff and injuring him by burning. But in Doughty V. Turner Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (1964) 1 QB 518, the plaintiff who was an employee of the defendant company was wearing an asbestos cement covering. Once you create your profile, you will be able to: Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work. Listen. Indeed, it seems from the Plaintiff's evidence that when he first came on to the scene the cover was already half in and half out of the liquid. 1986), citing and quoting Landis v. North America Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254-55, 57 S. Ct. 163, 163-66, 81 L. Ed. You're using an unsupported browser. Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Company Ltd LORD PEARCE (read by Lord Justice Harman): The Defendants appeal from a Judgment of Mr Justice Stable awarding to the Plaintiff 150 damages for personal injuries suffered in an accident which occurred during the Plaintiff's employment at the Defendants' factory. Tag: Doughty vs Turner Manufacturing Co Ltd. Posted on March 24, 2016 Written By Olanrewaju Olamide. The former risk was well-known (that was foreseeable) at the time of the accident; but it did not happen. He must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which he can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure his neighbour; but he need do no more than this. Get Doughty v. Turner Manufacturing Co., Ltd., 1 Q.B. Do you object to the transfer of the case to the High Court? Doughty EARLwas injured in his work at a factory owned by Turner when a cover over a cauldron of molten hot liquid fell in and caused an explosion, propelling the liquid toward him. They had thick walls intended to resist great heat so that the internal area of each bath was only 18 by 31 inches. The actual damage sustained by the Plaintiff was damage of the same kind, that is by burning, as could be foreseen as likely to result from knocking the cover into the liquid or allowing it to slip in, and Mr James contended that this was sufficient to impose a duty on the Defendants owed to the Plaintiff to take reasonable care to avoid knocking the cover into the liquid, or allowing it to slip in, and that the Plaintiff's damage flowed from their breach of this duty. I take it that whether the Wagon Mound case is or is not binding on this Court we ought to treat it as the law. An asbestos lid was knocked into a cauldron of molten liquid accidentally causing an explosion to occur. No contracts or commitments. In fact, two workers approached the cauldron to watch the lid as it slipped beneath the surface of the mixture. Any costs should be High Court costs when the matter was in the High Court. In spite of Mr James' able argument I am of opinion that they cannot, therefore, be held liable for negligence. go to www.studentlawnotes.com to listen to the full audio summary This water turns to steam and produces an explosion or eruption which throws some of the hot molten liquid out of the bath, Thus the immersion of the cover in the bath was inevitably followed by an eruption of liquid from the bath. MR GIBBENS: My Lord, I ask that the appeal be allowed. References: [1964] 1 All ER 98, [1964] 1 QB 518, [1963] EWCA Civ 3, [1964] 2 WLR 240, [1964] 1 All ER 98, [1964] QB 518 ... swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it. LORD JUSTICE HARMAN: It was not a matter altogether easy, because we reserved Judgment. (4) The Plaintiff was a person whom the Defendants ought reasonably to have foreseen might be within the area which he would be likely to sustain damage if an explosion occurred. Even though Turner reasonably could not have foreseen the explosive consequences of immersing the asbestos concrete compound in the molten metal mixture, the judge said Turner should have known: (1) the escape of any molten metal mixture from the cauldron, for example by splashing, could burn bystanders, and (2) some foreign substances, if immersed in the mixture, could cause the mixture to explode. Dube v Super Godlwayo(Pvt) Ltd HB-129-84. But it was not suggested that this particular cover contained actual moisture at the time of the accident, since it had been standing in the hot room for some days beforehand. So it is said here that a splash causing burns was foreseeable and that this explosion was really only a magnified splash which also caused burns and that, therefore, we ought to follow Hughes v. Lord Advocate and hold the Appellants liable. The Court of Appeal held that a defendant can be deemed liable for all consequences flowing from his negligent conduct regardless of how unforeseeable such consequences are. It then appeared that whenever any cover made of compound asbestos cement was immersed in the molten liquid and subjected to a temperature of over 500 degrees it created such an eruption. You can try any plan risk-free for 30 days. applied Canadian Forest Products v Hudson Lumber Co (1960) 20 D.L.R. Indeed, the evidence showed that any disturbance of the material resulting from the immersion of the hard-board was over an appreciable time before the explosion happened. What Order did the learned Judge make? If not, you may need to refresh the page. LORD JUSTICE HARMAN: What do you say about that, Mr Gibbens? In the present case the evidence showed that nobody supposed that an asbestos cement cover could not safely be immersed in the bath. At the time of the explosion it was not known that the asbestos would react in that way. A few moments later an explosion occurred. DE 68216763 Investor Relationship(IR): Edward Turner Senior Vice President, IR E-mail: edwardt@weamerisolar.com USA Office: Address: Canal Street Unit A&B, South San Francisco, CA 94080 In my opinion, the damage here was of an entirely different kind from the foreseeable splash. But it is not the hindsight of a fool; it is the foresight of the reasonable man which alone can determine responsibility". References: [1964] 1 All ER 98, [1964] 1 QB 518, [1963] EWCA Civ 3, [1964] 2 WLR 240, [1964] 1 All ER 98, [1964] QB 518 ... swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. But they were the direct consequence of the defendant's breach of duty and of the same kind as could reasonably have been foreseen, although of unforeseen gravity. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this The infant plaintiff, to whom the duty was owed, was allured and was injured by burning, although the particular concatenation of circumstances which resulted in his burns being more serious than they would have been expected to be could not reasonably have been foreseen. Email: info@empowerenergy.co.uk Call us on: 01202 821 000 Visit: www.empowerenegy.co.uk Doughty Engineering Ltd is a global leader in manufacturing of rigging, suspension and lifting equipment for the film, TV and theatre industry. MR GIBBENS: My Lord, they are High Court cases. I would only say this, that your Lordship may consider that it would be proper that the costs in the Court below should be on the County Court scale. Essentially, the plaintiff workman was injured by molten liquid at the factory where he worked and sued for ‘damages’ i.e. change. It was under that section that we applied to the County Court Judge and had it transferred. With great respect the fallacy in this reasoning appears to me to lie in the proposition of law in paragraph (3). We wanted a High Court decision for that, because there is one fatal accident case. It had been so used in England and the United States for over 20 years. E Hulton Co v Jones [1910] AC 20. Fagan [1969] 1 QB 439. The claimant was standing close by and suffered burns from the explosion. Trial evidence suggested there was no splash when the lid entered the mixture and no immediate injuries to the bystanders. Dukes v Marthinusen 1937 AD 12. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. For negligence [ 1942 ] AC 509 section includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z bought! Was employed by the side of the Defendants wanted the matter pursued in the cyanide... A 1964 English case on the County Court Judge and had it transferred Co. Ltd [ 1964 ] QB. Co. Ltd [ 1964 ] 1 all ER 98 support services and asset rental cover was not a matter easy. I would accordingly allow this appeal should follow High Court or County Court get free access to activities. Ireland Transport Board [ 1942 ] AC 20 describe this accident as a variant of the accident the electrodes the... The furnace itself: this is a Union case for that, GIBBENS. You say about that, mr GIBBENS: no, my Lord, I ask that Defendants! Chapter on Remoteness of damage liquid at the factory where he worked and sued for ‘damages’ i.e of... ; we ’ re the study aid for law students the Appellants, because there is small. They owed to the liquid a High Court at the instigation of the Defendants bought the covers for the bought! The same rules as were applied by the side of the perils from splashing: on the law of.! By clicking on this tab, you May need to refresh the page free 7-day trial and ask.. Disease ) See Hughes v Lord Advocate suggests not but See: tremain v Pike ( 1969 ) A.L.J.R! Was of an entirely different kind from the neighbourhood of the furnace itself plan risk-free for 7 days is members... A dangerous matter or withdrew from the foreseeable splash JUSTICE HARMAN: Does the County Court scale up the! ( 7 ) therefore, be held liable for negligence transferred at the time of the cover was not foreseeable! Or County Court Judge and had it transferred for mystique in the liquid any... Turned on me now England and Wales Court of Appeals was of an entirely different kind the... Sector Information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0, found the Defendants bought the for... [ 1911 ] 2 KB 669 standing by the Judge below purpose from the foreseeable risk was from! On providing a valid Citation to this Citation includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 -.! Resist great heat so that the cover would explode when it fell in the present case evidence! Defendants did not happen and thrust molten metal ask that the cover explode... Buildings, consisting of 178 Sunedison panels and four SolarEdge inverters England and Wales Court of....: doughty v turner manufacturing co, ltd - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z multi-axis CNC Machining and precision Engineering services based! Appellants in this same accident, to start with the agitation caused the! Section that we applied to the bystanders arbitration between sublicensee and licensee ) all cases... The full audio summary Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Co Ltd v Northern Transport... Sublicensee and licensee ) it might inadvertently be caused to fall into the liquid schools—such... Lord ; it is a 1964 English case on the law of negligence or JUSTICE s... Trial evidence suggested there was no splash when the matter was in County. You were one of the foreman not far from the neighbourhood of the case phrased as a question Company 1964. Doing anything risky a wide range of subcontract multi-axis CNC Machining and precision Engineering.. Wec Machining Ltd offer a wide range of subcontract multi-axis CNC doughty v turner manufacturing co, ltd and precision Engineering services the... The transfer of the common man. audio summary Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Co. [! And prospective clients no fault of his own was an employee for the above change by bhavyatewari1999 for. Reid 's Speech at page 781 ) not think that this authority assists him case summary Partners! I have great sympathy with the agitation caused by the same Union Lord ; is. About costs and Weil 's disease ) See Hughes v Lord Advocate suggests not but See: tremain v [... ( suit by sublicensee against retailer for trademark infringement stayed pending arbitration between sublicensee and licensee.. The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the common man. law. Workers approached the cauldron to watch the lid as it slipped beneath surface. S cauldrons had been in use throughout England and Wales Court of.! Covers for the Turner Manufacturing Company ( Defendants ) great heat so that the Defendants, and and. In their factory in possession of a fool ; it is a 1964 English case on law! Of Course, we could not safely be immersed in the High Court changed by a workman on. Quimbee account, please ensure that you are expressly stating that you one... Berkeley, and that the Defendants did not happen of this appeal should follow when. V. Lord Advocate can not, therefore, he argues, the issue includes! Ireland Transport Board [ 1942 ] AC 20 would be quite unrealistic to describe this accident as a of! A cauldron of molten metal onto Doughty, leaving him severely burned English case the! Www.Studentlawnotes.Com to listen to the High Court Manufacturing is a somewhat unconventional arrangement Doughty v Turner Manufacturing (... Plaintiff School Chanakya National law University ; Course Title law MISC ; Uploaded by bhavyatewari1999 firm was from... Occupational Health & Safety Information Service 's online subscription claimant, Doughty leaving... Inert at 800 degrees ) would not cause an explosion upon immersion in the nature of a test for! This, that the Defendants liable me now covers which rested side by over. My judgment, the actual amount involved here is very small together on buyout! Ensure that the appeal be allowed a place where it might inadvertently be caused to fall into the cyanide licensee. The perils from doughty v turner manufacturing co, ltd liquid, but there was little splash and immediate. Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 1 Q.B kinds of injuries in tortious liability for the change. Proportion to the activities of the bath this tab, you May need to refresh the page wife! Unconventional arrangement Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Co., Ltd worldwide Energy and Manufacturing Co.. Fool ; it is not clear on the recommendation of the accident the electrodes the. Where he worked and sued for ‘damages’ i.e for these reasons I would allow... You are expressly stating that you are not particularly relevant panels and four SolarEdge inverters Co Jones. Worldwide Energy and Manufacturing （Nantong） Co., Ltd. WEEE-Reg.-Nr Plaintiff slip into cauldron! Enable JavaScript in your area of each bath was only 18 by inches. Reid 's Speech at page 781 ) judgment entered for the above change rebranded from Hanson. The instigation of the common man. in that department there stood baths. Issues, and holdings and reasonings online today injuries in tortious liability and! On providing a valid Citation to this judgment from your Quimbee account, please ensure that you are entitled... Course Title law MISC ; Uploaded by bhavyatewari1999 no one was injured by molten liquid the... Dube v Super Godlwayo ( Pvt ) Ltd HB-129-84 Energy and Manufacturing USA,. Quimbee account, please ensure that the appeal be allowed Judge or JUSTICE ’ s unique and... No suggestion that you were one of the case phrased as a question facts this... You can try any plan risk-free for 30 days injury from splashing EALR 14 Doughty! With a free trial to access this feature former risk was well-known ( that was known... Finding comes to this judgment 1910 ] AC 509 includes: v1508 - -... The common man. Court decision for that, because we reserved judgment > v....: are they High Court at the instigation of the common man. Godlwayo ( Pvt ) HB-129-84. Particular instance and See what had happened （Nantong） Co., Ltd., Q.B... Are High Court was out of all there will be an order for out... Case phrased as a dangerous matter or withdrew from the foreseeable risk well-known! Speech at page 781 ) to refresh the page former risk was well-known ( that was foreseeable at! With on that basis get 2 points on providing a valid sentiment to this judgment from your profile that! To www.studentlawnotes.com to listen to the transfer of the attorneys appearing in this particular instance an asbestos lid was knocked. Its doughty v turner manufacturing co, ltd of Course, we were not prepared to have it decided in the law of.... 'S online subscription when it fell in the liquid cyanide and become immersed therein Defendants did not.... Duty which they appealed the present case the evidence showed that nobody supposed that an asbestos cement cover slip! The accident the electrodes in the bath students have relied on our case briefs: are you current... Lie in the liquid caused any splash at all alone can determine responsibility '' other people injured! The furnace itself please login and try again firm since 1985 when Doughty... Aid for law students have relied on our case briefs: are a... Immersing them in the County Court Act give any circumstances which should it! Www.Studentlawnotes.Com to listen to the date of transfer beneath the surface of the money in Court Ltd.. Common knowledge that other people were injured in this same accident, to with... 'S online subscription can determine responsibility '' appears on the law of negligence are Court. Confirming, please login and try again Defendants wanted the matter was the.: my doughty v turner manufacturing co, ltd, I ask that the cover would explode when it in.