The Court held that the first defendant (skipper of the colliding yacht) was solely liable for the collision caused by his failure to keep a proper lookout during a critical 10-second period when he was distracted by events within his vessel, and that the second defendant (skipper of the plaintiff's yacht) bore no fault. The Court rejected the defendants' contractual defences, holding that the plaintiff never became a party to any contract incorporating risk warnings or liability exclusions: the Clarke v Earl of Dunraven line of authority addresses what terms are incorporated into an existing contract, not whether a contract was formed, and the evidence of the informal QR code SailPass process was insufficient to establish contract formation, agency, or ratification binding the plaintiff to onerous disclaimer terms. The judgment was truncated before resolution of the dangerous recreational activity defence under s 5L and the assessment of damages.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.