Gorris v Scott [1874] LR 9 Exch 125
The scope of a statutory duty to prevent damages or losses of a certain kind.
Facts
A ship owner, the defendant, had contracted to carry a number of sheep from a foreign port to England. Some of the sheep were washed overboard and lost. The claimant alleges that the loss of the sheep was due to the ship owner’s neglect to comply with the Contagious Diseases Act 1869, of which one order specified that sheep from foreign ports ought to be divided into pens of specific dimensions and designates the floorings of such pens.
Issues
The question arose as to whether the ship owner’s failure to comply with the order under the Contagious Diseases Act 1869 allows the claimant to recover liability for the loss of some sheep overboard.
Decision/Outcome
The Court held that, in the case of a statutory duty giving rise to damages, the scope of the duty is to be deduced in accordance with the object and context of the statute. Accordingly, a person cannot claim for losses that fall outside the scope of that which the statute intends to protect. The purpose of the Contagious Diseases Act 1869, as deduced by the construction of the language and context of the statute, was to prevent the spread of contagious diseases amongst animals. Although the ship owner neglected to comply with the order concerning the storage of the sheep in a certain manner under the 1869 Act, the sheep were lost at sea and the damage sustained was unrelated to contagious diseases. Thus, the claimant could not recover for the loss of the sheep.
Updated 19 March 2026
This case summary remains legally accurate. Gorris v Scott [1874] LR 9 Exch 125 continues to be good law and is regularly cited as the leading authority on the scope of statutory duty in the tort of breach of statutory duty. The principle that a claimant cannot recover for losses falling outside the purpose for which a statutory duty was imposed remains firmly established in English law and has been applied and affirmed in numerous subsequent cases, including by the House of Lords and Supreme Court in the context of the Caparo line of authority and statutory interpretation generally. The Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act 1869 has long since been repealed, but this does not affect the legal significance of the case as a precedent. No legislative or judicial development has undermined the principle stated in this article.
