1 of 21

Slide Notes

DownloadGo Live

LAW OF TORT Client: Rusty Anchor Oy By LAWGICAL OY

Published on Apr 14, 2019

No Description

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

LAW OF TORTS
Client: Defendant Rusty Anchor Oy
By LAWGICAL OY

Emil Simula (Lawyer)
Joel Patanen (Lawyer)
Chi Ta (Consultant)
Tram Nguyen (Consultant)
Diana D´anello (Consultant)
Luukas Lönnrot (Secretary)

1. Case Summary

2. Juntti Singsong Oy should make the claim against Hoo Phat-hoe

Untitled Slide

  • The charter contract was between Hoo Phat-hoe and Rusty Anchor Oy.
  • Rusty Anchor, plays a role of agent, is liable for the transport performed by him: Article IV bis.
  • Hoo Phat-hoe and Juntti Singsong Oy have a sale contract and contract of carriage.

INCOTERMS 2010

Photo by Aaron Burden

CFR - Cost and Freight

Our client is not responsible for delivery to the final destination from the port (generally the buyer's facilities).

Our client is responsible for origin costs including export clearance and freight costs for carriage to named port.

Photo by Aaron Burden

A3 INCOTERMS 2010
A9 INCOTERMS 2010

Photo by Aaron Burden

3. Defence under the law of torts

Superior force:
An event or effect that cannot be reasonably anticipated or controlled.
Our client is not liable for any damages resulting from the failure to perform showed

Photo by Yuriy Kovalev

That the failure was “due to an impediment beyond his control”.

That the impediment was not something that could have reasonably taken into account at the time of contracting, and

That it remains unable to overcome the impediment or its consequences.

Hoo Phat-Hoe was responsible to notice Juntti Singsong about the risk and Juntti Singsong should have been aware of the risk

There are no certain proofs,
defendant has not been liable for intentionally causing damage.

Negligence
"The defect or omission of reasonable precaution or care. Having a legal duty to prevent something that is foreseeable but failing to do anything about it"

Claimant must prove

  • The existence of a defect
  • That the defect was the result of the defendant’s conduct
  • That the plaintiff suffered a damage
  • That the damage was caused by the defect
  • That the defendant breached a duty of care to the plaintiff.

4. Possibly claim as compensation

Photo by anieto2k

Juntti Singsong Oy cannot claim the amount of
20 000€ from our client. The Valued Policy of the insurance or reduction in value and cost of repair.

Juntti Singsong Oy can claim up the maximum amount of 10 000€ indemnity from their insurer.

Photo by KOREphotos

Juntti Singsong fails to make any claim against Rusty Anchor
(Article IV bis, Hague-Visby Rules).

Photo by KOREphotos

Our client is not in obligation to any compensation.

Untitled Slide

Photo by chuttersnap