Re Polemis and Furness, Withy and Co. Ltd.

Facts

• Workers negligently dropped a plank into the hold of a ship. The impact caused a spark. Petrol vapour present in the hold ignited, causing a fire that destroyed the entire vessel. The extent of this damage was far greater than what might specifically be anticipated from merely dropping a plank.

Issue

1. Whether a defendant is liable for the full extent of damage flowing directly, in an unbroken physical chain, from a negligent act, even where this specific kind or extent of damage was not itself foreseeable.

Held

• The fire was a direct, physical consequence of the negligent act, without any independent intervening cause breaking the chain. The defendant was liable for the full extent of this damage. This liability did not depend on whether this specific kind or extent of damage was itself reasonably foreseeable at the time of the negligent act.

Ratio Decidendi

Under the direct consequence test, a defendant is liable for all damage flowing directly from their negligent act, in an unbroken physical chain of causation, regardless of whether the specific kind or extent of that damage was itself foreseeable.