📢 Too many exams? Don’t know which one suits you best? Book Your Free Expert 👉 call Now!

    Question

    The Wagan Mound Case

    discusses:
    A the test of reasonable foresight. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    B the test of directness. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    C defamation Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    D negligence Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    E remoteness of damages and test of reasonable foresight. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

    Solution

    In order to calculate the damages remoteness test of directness was replaced with foreseeability in the Wagan Mound case. In this case a large quantity of oil was spilt into Sydney Harbour from the Wagon Mound and it drifted under the wharf where the claimants were oxyacetylene welding. The resulting fire caused extensive damage to the wharf and to vessels moored nearby. The Privy Council replaced the direct consequence test with the requirement that, in order to be recoverable, damage must be foreseeable in all the circumstances, thus, although pollution was a foreseeable consequence of the spillage, an outbreak of fire was not.

    Practice Next
    More Other Laws and Acts Questions

    Relevant for Exams:

    ask-question