Desgagnés Transport Inc v Wärtsilä Canada Inc: Implications for Maritime Industry

The Desgagnés Transport Inc v Wärtsilä Canada Inc case has significant implications for the maritime industry. This landmark decision sets a new standard for contractual obligations.

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Wärtsilä Canada Inc was liable for damages to Desgagnés Transport Inc due to its failure to deliver a ship's propeller on time. This ruling establishes the principle that a manufacturer's obligations are not limited to the delivery of the product, but also include ensuring the product is fit for use.

Delays and non-delivery of essential equipment can have serious consequences for shipping companies. In this case, the delay resulted in significant losses for Desgagnés Transport Inc.

On a similar theme: Last Mile Delivery Canada

Desgagnés Transport Inc v Wärtsilä Canada Inc was a case that made its way to the courts.

The dispute began in 2011, when Desgagnés Transport Inc, a shipping company, ordered a ship engine from Wärtsilä Canada Inc, a Finnish engine manufacturer.

Readers also liked: Chantier Davie Canada Inc

The engine was delivered in 2012, but it failed to meet the required performance standards.

The engine's performance issues caused significant problems for Desgagnés Transport Inc, including increased fuel consumption and reduced engine lifespan.

Desgagnés Transport Inc claimed damages from Wärtsilä Canada Inc, citing the engine's failure to meet the agreed-upon performance standards.

The court ultimately ruled in favor of Desgagnés Transport Inc, finding that Wärtsilä Canada Inc was liable for the damages caused by the defective engine.

Consider reading: Wine Transport Box

The Supreme Court of Canada played a significant role in the case of Transport Desgagnés Inc. v. Wärtsilä Canada Inc., 2019 CSC 58. The constitutional issues arose from a choice of law clause in the agreement that didn't specify whether Canadian maritime law or Quebec civil law governed the contract.

The clause in question stated that the contract would be governed by the laws in force at the registered office of the supplier. This ambiguity led to a trial judge interpreting the "office of the supplier" as Wärtsilä's place of business in Montréal, Quebec, where the contract was formed.

The laws in force in Quebec include both provincial and federal laws, making it necessary to undertake a constitutional analysis in this case.

Consider reading: Quebec & Ontario Transportation Company

Desgagnés Transport Inc v Wärtsilä Canada Inc was a significant case that involved two key parties: Desgagnés Transport Inc and Wärtsilä Canada Inc.

Desgagnés Transport Inc was the plaintiff in the case, a shipping company that owned and operated the vessel MV Forteza. Desgagnés Transport Inc claimed that Wärtsilä Canada Inc, the defendant, was responsible for the damages caused by the vessel's engine failure.

Wärtsilä Canada Inc is a leading provider of marine solutions and services, including engine maintenance and repair.

This decision has potentially far-reaching implications for contracts and disputes involving the transportation of goods across borders and the construction of projects under federal jurisdiction.

The Court's observation that the paramountcy doctrine did not apply where the Parliament of Canada has not legislated on a particular aspect is seen as an invitation for such action to take place.

Parties to future maritime contracts will need to carefully consider the consequences of their drafting, as the Court held that Canadian maritime law is a body of law separate from either common or civil law.

The Civil Code of Quebec could conceivably prohibit relying on a choice of law clause, as a matter of public order, which could impact how contracts are drafted in the future.

Intriguing read: United States House Transportation Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation