From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

[1943] 1 All ER 211 (CA) [also known as Edwin Lord v Pacific Steam Navigation Co]. The Manchester Regiment and the Oropesa_ collided at sea, as a result of the negligence of the crew of the latter. The MR was damaged but not, it was thought, in imminent danger of sinking. Most of the crew of the MR transferred to the O, leaving the master and a small contingent behind. When the weather worsened, the master and sixteen crewmembers set off in a lifeboat to the O, with a view to discussing how to proceed. However, the boat capsized and six men drowned. The question came down to this: were the owners of the Oropesa liable for their deaths? They had set off from the MR of their own volition, and were not in immediate danger. It was argued that there was thus a break in the chain of causation; the action of the master of the MR was anovus actus interveniens. However, the Court of Appeal held that his actions were not negligent -- knowing what he knew of his circumstances, and his duty to the crew it was not unreasonable of him to take the action he did. Since the presence of the men in the lifeboat followed directly from the negligence of the crew of the O, and there was no novus actus interveniens, the owners of the O were liable.