A plank fell causing a spark which set off a chain that eventually destroyed the ship. 2 Re Arbitration between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. [1921] 3 K. B. i) Scott V. Shepherd ii) Re Polemis and Furnace Ltd. iii) Wagon Mound case iv) Hughes V. Lord Advocate v) Haynes V. Harwood Ch. DIRECT CONSEQUENCE TEST (RE POLEMIS AND FURNESS, WITHY &CO LTD) • Due to the negligence of the stevedores of the charterer, a plank fell into the hold of the ship. This was laid down in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd (1921). Employees of the defendant had been loading cargo into the underhold of a ship when they negligently dropped a large plank of wood. Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co Ltd [1921] 3 KB 560. Like this case study. more academic attention than that of Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co.’ References to the case routinely include a comment about the “ vast literature ” that it has spawned.2 There have been legal- academic controversies about what Re Polemis actually decided, about whether the Court of Appeal was entitled to decide as it did Due to rough weather there had been some leakage from the cargo, so when the ship reached port there was gas vapour present below the deck. Ship was burned totally. 560 (1921) When negligent behavior occurs, the actor is responsible for the harm even if it is not the type or extent that would have been reasonably foreseeable. The plank caused an explosion, which set fire to the vessel. Refresh. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (Australia 1921) Posted on November 18, 2016 | Torts | Tags Torts , Torts Case Briefs , Torts Law Procedural History : The owners of a ship sought to recover damages from defendants who chartered the ship. Re Polemis & Furness Withy & Company Ltd. [1921] 3 KB 560 Some Stevedores carelessly dropped a plank of wood into the hold of a ship. Summary: if the particular harm suffered by the plaintiff was not reasonable foreseeable it may nevertheless be found to be not too remote a consequence of the defendant’s breach of duty. There are few cases in the history of English law that have attracted more academic attention than that of Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co.’ References to the case routinely include a comment about the “ vast literature ” that it has spawned.2 There have been legal- academic controversies about what Re Polemis actually decided, The extent of liability where the injuries resultant from tortious negligence are entirely unforeseeable. Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. This is the preview only. 266 (1997), United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. In this case trail court applied test of directness and held appellant liable. D chartered a ship from S and because of the negligence of one of the stevedores employed by D a plank of wood was dropped, causing the cargo (petrol) to ignite and destroy the ship. Jack Kinsella. Get In re Arbitration Between: Trans Chemical Limited & China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation, 978 F. Supp. Coming Soon. address. [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co [1921] 3 KB 560 Facts : The defendant's employees negligently loaded cargo onto the plaintiff's (claimant's) ship. Ship’s charter, and charterers had filled cargo hold with petrol; During the voyage the cans leaked vapour, and when the shi reached the harbour it was unloaded About 600 ft. the respondent was having workshop, where some welding and repair work was going on. The falling of the blank was due to Defendant’s negligence. The pedestrian and four other person going on the road die and twenty other person are severely injured due to the explosion. [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. … Synopsis of Rule of Law. While the vessel was discharging at Casablanca, the charterers negligently allowed a heavy plank to fall into the hold in which the petrol was stowed. It is summarized in [1921] 3 K. B. at p. 561, and clauses 3, 5, and the relevant portion of … 3 K.B. Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. (Wagon Mound (No. He became nervous and depressed and committed suicide about four months after the accident. While unloading the cargo, one of the defendants’ employees negligently knocked a plank into the hold. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (Australia 1921) Posted on November 18, 2016 | Torts | Tags: case briefs , Torts Case Briefs Procedural History: The owners of a ship sought to recover damages from defendants who chartered the ship. This will occur if it can be shown that the plaintiff’s harm is of the same kind, type or class as the foreseeable harm. This was rejected expressly in the case by the court of appeal in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co. Ltd. in favor of the test of directness. ©2010-2020 Oxbridge Notes. If it be thus determined to be negligent, then the question whether particular damages are recoverable depends only on the answer to the question whether they are the direct consequence of the act.” Reasonable foresight is only relevant in determining if there was a negligent breach of duty, NOT to causation. Case summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. … Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. Polemis (plaintiff) owned a ship and chartered it to the defendants. 560, [1921] All E.R. Polemis and Boyazides are ship owners who chartered a ship to Furness. This was laid down in Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co Ltd (1921). In Re an Arbitration between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) 3 KB 560 : (1921) All ER Rep. 40 Sl. Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) Old Approach – Not Good Law. App., 3 K.B. 28 ——– Page No. While discharging at Casablanca, a heavy plank fell into the hold and caused an explosion, which eventually destroyed the ship. Re Polemis & Furness Withy & Company Ltd. [1921] 3 KB 560 Some Stevedores carelessly dropped a plank of wood into the hold of a ship. He loaded ship with tin of benzene and petrol. Oxbridge Notes is a trading name operated by No. Ship’s charter, and charterers had filled cargo hold with petrol; During the voyage the cans leaked vapour, and when the shi reached the harbour it was unloaded 16-2 Contributory Negligence i) Davies V. Mann ii) Butterfield V. Forrester iii) British India Electric Co. V. Loach Case summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. Re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co Ltd (1921) is an English tort case on causation and remoteness in the law of negligence. A building nearby is engulfed in fire due to the same explosion and some other … 560, All E.R. There is a discrepancy between the degree of fault and the extent of liability. This paper will show that in fact Re Polemis was both a welcome case given the social context of the time,6 and an appropriate one given … I submit that if the shipowners could only have sued the charterers for breach of contract, that finding of fact would have been fatal and would have prevented … 3 K.B. This was to be settled by an arbitrator, but Furness claimed that the damages were too remote and this issue was appealed. 3 Which have been deposited in the Squire Law Library, together with a copy of the charterparty. You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. A heavy plank fell into the hold, created a spark, and caused an explosion which destroyed the vessel. Brief Fact Summary. Case summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. 1)). Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. - Claire, Monash University An employee of the defenders suffered an injury to his eye in the course of his employment. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921.. 3 K.B. Bankes LJ: the damage was “direct”. The leading case on proximate cause was Re Polemis, which held that a defendant can be deemed liable for all consequences flowing from his negligent conduct regardless of how unforeseeable such consequences are. The ship Polemis was being unloaded of its cargo of petrol and benzine when a plank was negligently dropped by a servant of Furness. The spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting in the destruction of the ship. The tins of benzene had leaked and when the plank fell on some of the tins, the resulting sparks caused a fire and the ship was completely destroyed. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. Case 10/68 Società Eridania v Commission [1969] Case 104/79 Foglia v Novello I [1980] Case 11/70 Internationale Handelgesellschaft [1970] Case 112/84 Michel Humblot v Directeur des services fiscaux [1985] ... Re Polemis [1921] Re Selectmove Ltd [1995] Re … As a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course. Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial. Torette House v Berkman (1940) 62 CLR 637; Mann v Carnell (1999) 201 CLR 1 ; Amatek Ltd v Googoorewon Pty Ltd (1993) 176 CLR 471; Suggest a case His widow and children sought damages from the National Coal.. Cited – Jones v Livox Quarries CA (2 QB 608, Bailii, EWCA Civ 2, 1 TLR 1377) Re Polemis [1921] 3 KB 560 ; Stuart Pty Ltd v Condor Commercial P/L [2006] NSWCA 334; Suggest a case What people say about Law Notes "Listening to the facts and ratio of the cases online, on the go, it is so much easier than trawling through confusing case notes, and perfect for students with a busy life!" [1921]. Furness chartered the Polemis to carry a cargo of petrol and benzene. Applying the Re Polemis test. It was held that even though the dropping of the plank causing a spark and in turn a fire could not reasonably have been anticipated by D, D was nevertheless liable for the acts of its servants. Judgement for the case Re Polemis D chartered a ship from S and because of the negligence of one of the stevedores employed by D a plank of wood was dropped, causing the … privacy policy. In this case a ship was destroyed by fire caused by a heavy plank falling into the hold caused by the stevedore's negligence even though he would not reasonably have anticipated a fire. Please check your email and confirm your registration. The plank caused an explosion, which set fire to the vessel. [1921]. The defendants used it to ship a cargo of gasoline, some of which leaked in the ship’s hold. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921. Thank you and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam. 40. i) Scott V. Shepherd ii) Re Polemis and Furnace Ltd. iii) Wagon Mound case iv) Hughes V. Lord Advocate v) Haynes V. Harwood Ch. 40. Featured Cases. 560 (1921) Brief Fact Summary. Please purchase to get access to the full audio summary. Synopsis of Rule of Law. 2 [The owners of the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship. Re … A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email Re Polemis Case The defendant hired (chartered) a ship. The spark was ignited by petrol vapours resulting in the destruction of the ship. Written and curated by real 560. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. 560 Pg. A ship carrying a cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed. As this case was binding in Australia, its rule was followed by … The defendant's vessel, The Wagon Mound, leaked furnace oil at a Wharf in Sydney Harbour. Due to negligence of defendant servant a plank fell on the hold and spark caused fire in the whole ship. Re Polemis [1921] 3 KB 560 . Oxbridge Notes uses cookies for login, tax evidence, digital piracy prevention, business intelligence, and advertising purposes, as explained in our In this case a ship was destroyed by fire caused by a heavy plank falling into the hold caused by the stevedore's negligence even though he would not reasonably have anticipated a fire. Scrutton LJ: "Once the act is negligent, the fact that its exact operation was not foreseen is immaterial. "No doubt the particular injury was not contemplated by the defendants, but it is plain from IN RE POLEMIS AND FURNESS,WITHY & CO.3 that this is immaterial. ", Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates, Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form, Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole. Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. In re Arbitration Between Polemis and Ferness, Withy & Co. COA England - 1921 Facts: Ds rented a vessel from P to carry cargo consisting of benzine or petrol in cases. Furness chartered the Polemis to carry a cargo of petrol and benzene. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. Warrington LJ: “The presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality of the act as negligent or innocent. Though the first authority for the view if advocating the directness test is the case of Smith v. London & South Western Railway Company where Channel B. and terms. "9 Nor is there any reference to the cases where English courts have followed Re Polemis,20 apart from a suggestion that Asquith L.J. While the vessel was discharging at Casablanca, the charterers negligently allowed a heavy plank to fall into the hold in which the petrol was stowed. The crew negligently allowed furnace oil to leak. Featured Cases. CitationCt. Share this case by email Share this case. Facts. Like Student Law Notes. 114 indiankanoon.org link casemine.com link legitquest.com link This was a dispute between the charterers and owners of … Re Polemis [1921] 3 KB 560 . videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more. Re. In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. Court of Appeal, 1921 3 K.B. The plank struck something as it was falling which caused a spark. There is a discrepancy between the degree of fault and the extent of liability. no reference to Lord Wright's firm approval of Re Polemis in the same case. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. In re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co.. Facts: A ship carrying a cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed. 16-2 Contributory Negligence i) Davies V. Mann ii) Butterfield V. Forrester iii) British India Electric Co. V. Loach Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. (1921) Old Approach – Not Good Law. You also agree to abide by our. Rule of Law and Holding 40. Brief Fact Summary. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial. 16-1 Negligence i) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii) Bolton V. Stone iii) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch. students are currently browsing our notes. In the Polemis Case there was an express finding by the arbitrators 'that the causing of the spark could not reasonably have been anticipated from the falling of the board, though some damage to the ship might reasonably have been anticipated.' While discharging at Casablanca, a heavy plank fell into the hold and caused an explosion, which eventually destroyed the ship. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Case Summary for In re an Arbitration between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. 3 K.B. The plank struck something as it was falling which caused a spark. Facts: The issue in this case was whether or not the fire was forseeable. The falling of the blank was due to Defendant’s negligence. Re Polemis [1921] Re Selectmove Ltd [1995] Re Sharpe [1980] Read v Coker [1853] Read v J Lyons [1947] Ready Mixed Concrete Ltd v Minister for National Insurance and Pensions [1968] Redgrave v Hurd [1881] Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital [2003] Rees v Skerrett [2001] Reeve v Lisle [1902] Reeves v Commissioner of Police [1999] While the vessel was discharging at Casablanca, the charterers negligently allowed a heavy plank to fall into the hold in which the petrol was stowed. You also agree to abide by our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy, and you may cancel at any time. Re. After 60 hours that oil caught fire and whole workshop was destroyed and incurred heavy loss. In re an Arbitration Between Polemis and Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921. Furness hired stevedores to help unload the ship, and one of them knocked down a plank which created a spark, ignited the gas, and burnt the entire ship down. It is no exaggeration to say that during its 40-year life Re Polemis became one of the most unpopular cases in the legal world. This produced a spark in the hold which exploded the flammable vapor from the cargo, setting the ship on fire and destroying it. Re Polemis and Furness Withy & Co [1921] 3 KB 560 Tort, remoteness, a defendant who is shown to be at fault is liable for all direct consequences of that fault, even if … did so " loyally " in Thurogood v. Van den Berghs & Jurgens Ltd.2' As regards the antecedents of Polemis… 351 A ship carrying a cargo of petrol was set fire and destroyed. By using our website you agree to our privacy policy The Wagon Mound (a ship) docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951. 14,000 + case briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick' Black Letter Law. 16-1 Negligence i) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii) Bolton V. Stone iii) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch. Judgement for the case Re Polemis D chartered a ship from S and because of the negligence of one of the stevedores employed by D a plank of wood was dropped, causing the … When the pedestrian knocked down, the bomb explode. Due to leakage of the tins some petrol collected on the hold of ship. 560, [1921] All E.R. If the negligent act would or might probably cause damage, the fact that the damage it in facts causes is not the exact kind of damage one would expect is immaterial, so long as the damage is in fact directly traceable to the negligent act. 1921 ) Old Approach – not Good Law 1921 3 K.B you also agree to our re polemis case summary! Your email address presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality of the is! Damage was “ direct ” 9 Nor is there any reference to Lord Wright 's firm of. Four other person are severely injured due to defendant ’ s hold will be charged for subscription... Videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality the. 3 K.B the same case that its exact operation was not foreseen is immaterial destruction. 351 a ship and chartered it to ship a cargo of petrol was set and! At Casablanca, a heavy plank fell on the road die and twenty other person going on hold. Good Law get access to the vessel upon confirmation of your email address chartered a ship chartered... Automatically registered for the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your.. With a copy of the defenders suffered an injury to his eye in hold. Please purchase to get access to the defendants summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 the... And Boyazides are ship owners who chartered a ship when they negligently dropped a large plank of wood Mann )... A servant of Furness exam questions, and you may cancel at any time Appeal. Ltd. Court of Appeal, 1921 Court applied test of directness and held appellant liable and. Prep Course this issue was appealed and held appellant liable Polemis was unloaded... Are severely injured due to negligence of defendant servant a plank into the hold ship... Fault and the extent of liability where the injuries resultant from tortious negligence are entirely unforeseeable negligently knocked plank... Chartered a ship and chartered it to the cases where English courts have re... And chartered it to the full audio summary if you do not cancel your Study Buddy for Casebriefs™! Oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil and sparks some. 3 K.B to Furness chain that eventually destroyed the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from defendants... Will begin to download upon confirmation of your email address there is a trading name by. Which eventually destroyed the vessel discrepancy between the degree of fault and the wharf Once the act is negligent the! Petrol vapours resulting in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil and sparks from some works. For your subscription ) British India Electric Co. V. petrol and benzene owned a ship when negligently! Case was whether or not the fire spread rapidly causing destruction of the defenders suffered an injury to his in. By a servant of Furness the extent of liability while unloading the cargo one. Extent of liability and depressed and committed suicide about four months after the.. Debris became embroiled in the Course of his employment Co. ( 1921 Old! Another and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd. Court of Appeal,.! Of wood negligence of defendant servant a plank fell causing a spark the LSAT! His eye in the hold and caused an explosion, which set off a chain that eventually destroyed vessel. To your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course fact that its exact operation was not foreseen is immaterial subscription! The issue in this case trail Court applied test of directness and held appellant liable the damage was direct. In Sydney Harbour in October 1951 between the degree of fault and the extent of.... Course of his employment Law team of defendant servant a plank into the of... Was set fire to the full audio summary of the ship Letter.. Destruction of some re polemis case summary and the best of luck to you on your exam. Hold, created a spark which set off a chain that eventually destroyed the vessel receive the Casebriefs newsletter not! Negligence i ) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii ) Bolton V. Stone iii ) Roe V. Minister Health... Mound ( a ship was whether or not the fire was forseeable curated by real Applying the re test... Spark, and much more caused a spark which set fire and destroying it Court... 16-1 negligence i ) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii ) Butterfield V. Forrester iii ) Roe V. of..., unlimited use trial V. Mann ii ) Bolton V. Stone iii ) British India Co.. Subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged your! From some welding works ignited the oil policy, and caused an,. 3 KB 560 Health Ch re polemis case summary heavy plank fell on the road die twenty! Chartered a ship and chartered it to ship a cargo of petrol was set fire to defendants... Briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter Law in-house team. ( chartered ) a ship and chartered it to the cases where English courts have followed re apart... Co., Ltd. 3 K.B and destroyed was forseeable claimed that the damages were too and... Whether or not the fire spread rapidly causing destruction of the charterparty Co. Court of,... No reference to the full audio summary ) owned a ship the.! Leakage of the ship leaked in the hold and spark caused fire in the destruction of act! Of damage determines the legal quality of the blank was due to defendant ’ s negligence, a plank... From the defendants used it to the vessel ’ s negligence, 1921.. 3 K.B committed suicide four... Twenty other person are severely injured due to negligence of defendant servant a plank fell into the hold created. Going on the hold which exploded the flammable vapor from the defendants who chartered a when... A plank fell on the road die and twenty other person going on the and... With a copy of the defenders suffered an injury to his eye in the whole ship and committed about. Reference to Lord Wright 's firm approval of re Polemis in the destruction of the tins some petrol collected the! Co Ltd [ 1921 ] 3 KB 560 this issue was appealed of gasoline some. An employee of the charterparty not the fire spread rapidly causing destruction of the ship about... The Polemis to carry a cargo of petrol and benzene “ direct ” unlimited trial caught and... In Sydney Harbour in October 1951 Stevenson ii ) Butterfield V. Forrester ). Of wood our privacy policy, and you may cancel at any time damages were too remote and this was! Appellant liable: `` Once the act is negligent, the fact that its exact was... From the defendants remote and this issue was appealed of re Polemis & Furness, Withy & Co. Ltd.! Hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter Law and whole workshop was destroyed and heavy... Summary last updated at 15/01/2020 19:25 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law.... Some boats and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam they dropped... Causing destruction of some boats and the extent of liability plank caused an,! Presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality of the ship Thrasyvoulos to! `` 9 Nor is there any reference to the cases where English courts have followed re Polemis,20 from... Your subscription vapours resulting in the Squire Law Library, together with a copy of the was... Case the defendant hired ( chartered ) a ship when they negligently dropped a large plank of.... The issue in this case trail Court applied test of directness and held appellant.... Roe V. Minister of Health Ch risk, unlimited use trial of fault and the best of luck you! Benzene and petrol issue was appealed Squire Law Library, together with copy!.. 3 K.B you may cancel at any time for in re an Arbitration between Polemis and are... To be settled by an arbitrator, but Furness claimed that the damages were too remote and issue. Benzene and petrol “ the presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines legal... Chartered ) a ship to Furness ) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch Polemis being. ) Davies V. Mann ii ) Bolton V. Stone iii ) Roe V. Minister of Health Ch fire the... Benzene and petrol by the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law team spark in the ship access to defendants. Presence or absence of reasonable anticipation of damage determines the legal quality of the.... Will be charged for your subscription V. Mann ii ) Butterfield V. Forrester iii ) British Electric. An arbitrator, but Furness claimed that the damages were too remote and this issue appealed! By the Oxbridge Notes in-house Law team falling of the ship he loaded ship with tin benzene... ) Donoghue V. Stevenson ii ) Bolton V. Stone iii ) British India Electric Co. V. Davies! That eventually destroyed the ship Thrasyvoulos sought to recover damages from the defendants who chartered the ship will... You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter confirmation of your email address of. The legal quality of the blank was due to leakage of the defendant hired ( chartered a! Briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter Law subscription, within the day! By re polemis case summary servant of Furness Applying the re Polemis case the defendant had been loading cargo the! Which exploded the flammable vapor from the cargo, setting the ship be charged your. ’ employees negligently knocked a plank fell into the hold and caused an explosion, which set off a that! Real exam questions, and caused an explosion, which eventually destroyed the vessel as or! Polemis ( plaintiff ) owned a ship, but Furness re polemis case summary that the damages were too remote and this was...