Re The Oropesa [1943] P 32 (CA)

Facts

  • During World War II the steamship The Oropesa collided in the North Atlantic with the vessel The Manchester Regiment, causing serious damage.
  • After the collision the captain of The Manchester Regiment ordered a lifeboat launched to transfer passengers and crew to the apparently less-damaged Oropesa.
  • The lifeboat capsized in heavy seas and several occupants died.
  • Representatives of the deceased sued, alleging the collision was due to the negligence of The Oropesa’s crew.
  • The defendants contended that the captain’s decision to launch the lifeboat was an independent, unforeseeable act that constituted a novus actus interveniens, thereby severing the causal link between their negligence and the fatalities.

Issues

  1. Whether the decision to launch the lifeboat amounted to a novus actus interveniens that broke the chain of causation between the collision and the deaths.
  2. Whether the deaths and related losses were nonetheless legally attributable to the negligent navigation of The Oropesa.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal rejected the argument that the rescue attempt was an intervening act; it was a natural, reasonable and foreseeable response to the emergency created by the collision.
  • Because the chain of causation remained intact, liability for the deaths rested with the negligent crew of The Oropesa.
  • The court affirmed that, in general, acts of necessity or rescue undertaken in the face of danger caused by a defendant’s negligence do not absolve that defendant of liability.

Legal Principles

  • Causation in negligence comprises factual causation (“but for” test) and legal causation (remoteness and intervening acts).
  • An intervening act will break the chain only if it is unreasonable or unforeseeable; reasonable rescue efforts are ordinarily foreseeable.
  • Human actions taken in emergencies are treated as foreseeable when assessing legal causation.
  • Negligent parties remain liable for ensuing harm where subsequent rescue attempts are a foreseeable consequence of their breach.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal held that the foreseeable and reasonable rescue attempt following the collision did not constitute a new intervening act; consequently, the deaths were legally caused by the negligent navigation of The Oropesa, and liability was upheld against its owners.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal