Mulligan v Holland Dreging Company (Irl) Ltd

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeO'Flaherty J.
Judgment Date21 November 1996
Neutral Citation1997 WJSC-SC 1763
Docket Number(31/95)
CourtSupreme Court
Date21 November 1996
MULLIGAN V. HOLLAND DREGING CO (IRL) LTD
AN CH ÚIRT UACHTARACH
JOHN MULLIGAN
Plaintiff/Appellant
.V.
HOLLAND DREDGING COMPANY (IRL) LTD.
Defendants/Respondent

1997 WJSC-SC 1763

(31/95)

THE SUPREME COURT

Synopsis:

NEGLIGENCE

Accident on ship - personal injuries - statutory safety and inspection requirements complied with - whether defendant negligent - Held: Negligence not established - Supreme Court: Hamilton C.J., O'Flaherty J., Murphy J. - 21/11/1996

|Mulligan v. Holland Dredging Co. (Irl) Ltd.|

Citations:

KENNY V IRISH SHIPPING UNREP SUPREME 4.11.68

MOORE V FULLERTON 1991 ILRM 29

1

Judgment delivered on the 21st November, 1996 byO'Flaherty J. [NEM DISS]

O'Flaherty J.
2

This is an appeal brought by the plaintiff from the judgment and order of the High Court (O'Hanlon J.) of the 23rd January,, 1995, dismissing his claim for damages for personal injuries arising out of an accident that befell him in the course of his employment, as he alleged, with the defendants on the 16th July, 1987. On that occasion he was working as a deckhand on the dredgerNeptune in the port of Haifa when he fell from a vertical ladder linking the deck of the vessel to a stores area below. He sustained an injury to his back.

3

The plaintiff, who was aged fifty three years at the date of the accident, had spent all his working life, since he had left school at fourteen years, on construction work on land as well as much work on vessels at sea either as a marine engineer or as a deckhand.

4

In 1987 he was contacted by Mr. Dominic Daly, a director of the defendant company, and offered work as a deckhand on board theNeptune. He agreed to take on the work which, at the start, was for a period of some weeks. He was kept on from March up until the 16th July, 1987, working for nine weeks on, followed by four weeks off. During his weeks on board he worked a twelve hour day, seven days a week, but with occasional breaks for shore leave. The evidence established that the plaintiff had used the ladder in question on hundreds of occasions prior to his accident.

5

The defendant company is a subsidiary of a Dutch company named Baggermaatschappij B.V. and it appears that the work in Haifa was being carried out by another subsidiary of the Dutch parent company, Holland Dredging Company (Israel) Limited, which, as found by the trial judge, was operating theNeptune under a hiring agreement made in the Netherlands on the 1st January, 1986.

6

Again, as found by the trial judge, it emerged that the parent company in the Netherlands accepted responsibility for payment of the plaintiff's wages while he was working in Haifa, and also the cost of transport of the plaintiff between his home in Ireland and Israel. The inter-company arrangement was that the defendants would initially make the necessary payments to the plaintiff having made the appropriate deductions in respect of a person whose domicile was in Ireland, and were later recouped for such expenditure by the Dutch parent company.

7

While on board theNeptune in Haifa, the plaintiff was under the command of Captain Volker who, in turn, was employed by Baggermaatschappij B.V. and who had been captain of the vessel since its construction four years or so before.

8

The plaintiff claimed that when making his way from the hatch opening at deck level onto the ladder beneath, it was necessary for him to put one leg down until his foot rested on a narrow bracket linking the top of the ladder to the structure of the vessel and to then bring the other leg down to the top rung of the ladder and begin the descent in that manner. He said that on the day of the accident he had just reached the position with one foot on the bracket on top of the stile of the ladder and the other on the top rung, when he slipped and fell over twelve feet to the floor beneath, striking his back against a freezer which was located beside the ladder. It is relevant to point out that he did not seem to know what caused him to thus slip. He was asked as follows:-

Q.

Do you know why you slipped or what caused you to slip?

A.

I don't honestly know. I think I must have slipped off the top when I was trying to transfer my food down to the ladder.

Q.

Which foot, your right foot or your left foot?

A.

My right foot probably.

9

Mr. JUSTICE O'HANLON: When, where was your right foot when you actually slipped.

10

A. It was on the bracket for holding the ladder.

11

MR. JUSTICE O'HANLON: Your right foot?

12

A. Yes, that's right.

13

MR. JUSTICE O'HANLON: And what about your left foot?

14

A. My left foot more than likely, the top rung of the ladder.

15

MR. JUSTICE O'HANLON: So you think you had swung your left foot into the hatch. You didn't say that up to now?

16

A. Sorry, Your Honour.

17

Mr. Anthony Brennan, consulting engineer, who gave evidence on behalf of the plaintiff, did not get an opportunity to inspect the vessel until the 26th September, 1994, by which time a ladder set at an angle had been constructed to replace the vertical ladder from which the plaintiff said that he had his fall. When asked how this new installation, at the angle which it was, compared with the original vertical ladder as described by the plaintiff, Mr. Brennan said that there was no comparison. The ladder that he saw was safe and had a safe and secure foothold in the steps. The steps, he said, were specifically designed and constructed to give a good grip.

18

So, the case as presented before us on the negligence aspect on behalf of the plaintiff, is that the ladder that should have been available to the plaintiff was the one that Mr. Brennan saw, not the one that was installed when the dredger was built and from which the plaintiff fell.

19

The learned trial judge gave the following description of the place that the accident happened as follows:-

"The hatch opening at deck level is surmounted by a box-like structure, the top of which is capable of being opened fully to allow stores to be loaded and unloaded, but there is a smaller opening in the top cover which would normally be used on all other...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT