Charles Church (Spitfires) Ltd and Charles Church (Displays) Ltd v Aviation Jersey Ltd and Griffiths

CourtRoyal Court
JudgeCrill, Bailiff:
Judgment Date16 June 1993
Date16 June 1993
Crill, Bailiff:

A.D. Robinson for the plaintiffs;

R.A. Falle for the defendants.

Cases cited:

(1) Cartledge v. E. Jopling & Sons Ltd., [1963] A.C. 758; [1963] 1 All E.R. 341; [1963] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 1; (1963), 107 Sol. Jo. 73, considered.

(2) Dempster v. City Garage Ltd., Royal Ct., March 24th, 1992, unreported.

(3) Dove v. Banhams Patent Locks Ltd., [1983] 1 W.L.R. 1436; [1983] 2 All E.R. 833; (1983), 127 Sol. Jo. 748.

(4) Kwanza Hotels Ltd. v. Sogeo Co. Ltd., 1983 J.J. 105.

(5) Nitrigin Eireann Teoranta v. Inco Alloys Ltd., [1992] 1 W.L.R. 498; [1992] 1 All E.R. 854; (1992), 60 BLR 65; 135 Sol. Jo. (L.B.) 213, followed.

(6) Pirelli Gen. Cable Works Ltd. v. Oscar Faber & Partners, [1983] 2 A.C. 1; [1983] 1 All E.R. 65; (1983), 127 Sol. Jo. 16, distinguished.

(7) Sparham-Souter v. Town & Country Devs. (Essex) Ltd., [1976] Q.B. 858; [1976] 2 All E.R. 65; (1976), 74 L.G.R. 355; 120 Sol. Jo. 216, considered.

(8) Watson v. Priddy, 1977 J.J. 145, considered.

Additional cases cited by counsel:

Archer v. Catton & Co. Ltd., [1954] 1 All E.R. 896.

Mathew v. Maughold Life Assur. Co. Ltd., The Times, January 23rd, 1985.

Moore (D.W.) & Co v. Ferrier, [1988] 1 All E.R. 400.

Legislation construed:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Jersey) Law 1960, art. 2(1): The relevant terms of this paragraph are set out at page 95, lines 12-14.

Limitation of Actions—tort actions—negligence—latent damage—time runs from date on which manifested by physical damage to plaintiff's property, not date of defendant's negligence, in absence of special relationship between parties

The plaintiffs brought an action against the defendants for damages following the crashing of their aircraft allegedly caused by the negligence of the defendants.

The plaintiffs were the owner and operator respectively of an aircraft whose engine required rebuilding. The first defendant company (of which the second defendant was the technical director) carried out the work, which included regrinding the aircraft's crank-shaft. Some time after the work was completed but after only a few hours' flying time, the aircraft crashed and the plaintiffs alleged that this had been caused by the crank-shaft fracturing, the defendants having reground it negligently. There was no evidence of any damage having occurred prior to the crash.

The plaintiffs brought the present proceedings, within three years of the date of the crash but more than three years after the work had been carried out. By an order of the Judicial Greffier, the issues were limited to the question whether the plaintiffs' action was time-barred by the provisions of art. 2(1) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Jersey) Law 1960, by which the limitation period for actions founded on tort was three years. The court considered whether the relationship between the parties was such as to create a special duty of care on the part of the defendants and, in the light of this, whether the plaintiffs' cause of action had arisen at the time of the crash or at the time the crank-shaft was reground.

Held, giving judgment for the plaintiffs:

The relationship between the parties was not such as to give rise to a special duty of care on the part of the defendants. Furthermore, it was impossible to determine the point in time at which the defect in the crank-shaft had come into existence and until the crash, no personal injury or damage to property of the plaintiffs, other than the crank-shaft itself, had occurred. The plaintiffs' cause of action...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Rockhampton Apartments Ltd and Antler Property C.I. Ltd v Gale and Clarke
    • Jersey
    • Court of Appeal
    • 15 June 2007 (8) Chisholm v. Glendewar (1924), 233 Ex. 31, unreported, considered. (9) Church (Charles) (Spitfires) Ltd. v. Aviation Jersey Ltd., 1993 JLR 93, considered. (10) Cornick v. Le Gac, 2003 JLR N [43], considered. (11) Coutanche v. Lefebvre (1955), 249 Ex. 390, unreported, considered. (12)......
  • Maynard v Public Services Committee (Jersey)
    • Jersey
    • Court of Appeal
    • 11 December 1996 counsel: Bell v. Heating & Ventilation Engr. Co. Ltd., 1985-86 JLR 241. Church (Charles) (Spitfires) Ltd. v. Aviation (Jersey) Ltd., 1993 JLR 93. de Carteret v. Applegate, 1985-86 JLR 236. Foster v. Att. Gen., 1992 JLR 6. Knight v. Le Gallais Real Estates Ltd., 1952 J.J. 19. Letang v. Co......
  • Maynard v Public Services Committee
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 17 March 1995
    ...v. Bonomi (1861), 11 E.R. 825. Battley v. Faulkner (1820), 106 E.R. 668. Church (Charles) (Spitfires) Ltd. v. Aviation Jersey Ltd., 1993 JLR 93. Gibbs v. Guild (1882), 9 Q.B.D. 59. Howell v. Young (1826), 108 E.R. 97. Letang v. Cooper, [1964] 2 All E.R. 929. Lynn v. Bamber, [1930] 2 K.B. 72......
  • Gale and Clarke v Rockhampton and Antler
    • Jersey
    • Court of Appeal
    • 15 June 2007
    ...53. Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Jersey) Law 1960. Charles Church (Spitfires) Limited and Anr v Aviation Jersey Limited and Anr [1993] JLR 93. Appeal by the Appellants against the judgment given by the Bailiff of Jersey, sitting alone as a Judge of the Samedi Division of the Royal......

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