DUNCAN v. CAMMELL LAIRD & CO., LTD., AND OTHERS. CRAVEN v. SAME. [THE "THETIS."]
(1943) 77 Ll L Rep 435
COURT OF APPEAL.
Before Lord Greene (Master of the Rolls), Lord Justice Goddard and Lord Justice du Parcq.
Negligence - Shipbuilders - King's ship - Trials-Sinking of submarine Thetis with crew during diving trials in Liverpool Bay -Civilian and naval personnel on board- Failure of rescue operations-Submarine salved later-Consolidated claims by personal representatives-Thetis, built by C. L., not yet accepted by Admiralty- "All trials, including completion trials, and gun trials, and the navigation of the vessel and the working of the machinery during passage to and from the place of trial, and on all other occasions required by the specification and by these conditions, shall be conducted at the risk and at the expense of the contractors"-W. D. B. under sub-contract with C. L. to carry out certain painting work to vessel (including torpedo tubes) such work "to be to the entire satisfaction and approval of the Admiralty overseer"-Cause of loss-Failure of submarine to submerge according to plan-Rear door of No. 5 torpedo tube opened by W. (officer in charge of tube compartment) and H. (experienced naval rating) in belief that tube was empty-Submarine flooded by sea water through No. 5 tube (bow cap being open to sea)-Precautions taken by W. and H. before opening rear door- Negative results obtained from test cock- Evidence that hole in test cock was ineffective because it was completely blocked by paint negligently applied by workman of W. D. B.-Painting work passed by employee of C. L. as fit for inspection by Admiralty overseer-No
inspection by Admiralty overseer-Allegations of negligence against W. and H.; against W. D. B., against C. L.; and against B. (naval officer in charge of submarine) -Whether W. and H. took all reasonable steps to ascertain real condition of affairs inside No. 5 tube-Provision of reamer to clear possible obstruction in hole in test cock-Reamer not used by W. or H.-Liability of W. D. B.-Duty towards third persons in carrying out painting work-Rear door normally harmless but rendered dangerous by negligent work- "Proximity"-Duty of C. L. towards persons on board-Invitors-Vessel in their control and occupation up to date of commencement of trials-Opportunity to detect and remedy defect-Alleged failure by C. L. to see that submarine was equipped with quantities of soda lime- Whether C. L. and B. guilty of negligence leading to failure of rescue operations.