The case concerned damage to the plaintiffs' coach while being carried on the defendants' ferry Lion from Boulogne, France, to Dover, UK, during a force 10 gale in February 1984. The coach, parked unsecured on the car deck, overturned following a violent roll of the vessel and was written off. The plaintiffs alleged negligence and recklessness by the defendants’ crew and claimed damages of approximately GBP 65,000. The defendants denied fault and alternatively sought to limit their liability under art 8 of the Athens Convention 1974. The plaintiffs argued that the defendants were disentitled from relying on art 8 because: (i) the crew's alleged recklessness engaged art 13 of the Convention; and (ii) the defendants had failed to comply with SI 1980 No 1125 (UK), which required notice of certain Convention provisions to passengers.

Held: The defendants were entitled to rely on art 8 of the Athens Convention 1974, and the plaintiffs' claim to disapply the limitation of liability failed.

The drafting of the Convention is clear. When it says 'carrier', it means carrier and does not include the servants or agents of the carrier. When it does intend to include those persons it says so. This is clear from the drafting of art 13 itself. Paragraph 1 states that 'the carrier shall not be entitled to the benefit of the limit if it is proved damage resulted from an act or omission of the carrier'. Paragraph 2 states that the 'servant or agent of the carrier shall not be entitled to the benefit of those limits if it is proved that the damage resulted from an act or omission of that servant or agent'.

The scheme of the Convention was also made clear beyond argument by the definition which includes a definition of 'carrier' which is limited to the 'person by or on behalf of whom a contract of carriage has been concluded', and by the terms of art 3, which is the relevant heading for liability of the carrier. The carrier shall be liable for the damage suffered as a result of various matters 'if the incident which caused the damage so suffered occurred in the course of the carriage and was due to the fault or neglect of the carrier or his servants or agents acting within the scope of their employment'.

It is clear from the drafting of the Convention that when a wider expression is intended than simply the carrier itself appropriate words are used. In art 13.1 they are not.