▁appeal ▁directly ▁to ▁the ▁Priv y ▁Council ▁on ▁the ▁ver dict ▁of ▁n uis ance ▁and ▁the ▁Miller ▁Ste am ship ▁Co ▁obtained ▁leave ▁to ▁appeal ▁on ▁the ▁ver dict ▁of ▁neg lig ence . ▁ ▁Jud gment ▁ ▁The ▁Priv y ▁Council ▁u ph eld ▁both ▁the ▁appeal ▁and ▁the ▁cross - appe al . ▁They ▁held ▁that ▁it ▁was ▁not ▁sufficient ▁that ▁the ▁ ▁damage ▁to ▁by ▁ ▁the ▁Miller ▁Ste am ship ▁vessels ▁was ▁the ▁direct ▁result ▁of ▁the ▁n uis ance ▁if ▁that ▁damage ▁was ▁un for ese e able . ▁In ▁relation ▁to ▁neg lig ence ▁the ▁Priv y ▁Council ▁held ▁that ▁a ▁reasonable ▁person ▁in ▁the ▁position ▁of ▁the ▁ship ' s ▁engineer ▁would ▁have ▁been ▁aware ▁of ▁the ▁risk ▁of ▁fire . ▁Since ▁the ▁gravity ▁of ▁the ▁potential ▁damage ▁from ▁fire ▁was ▁so ▁great ▁there ▁was ▁no ▁exc use ▁for ▁allowing ▁the ▁oil ▁to ▁be ▁dis charg ed ▁even ▁if ▁the ▁probability ▁or ▁risk ▁of ▁fire ▁was ▁low . ▁A ▁reasonable ▁person , ▁the ▁Council ▁held , ▁would ▁only ▁neglect ▁a ▁risk ▁of ▁such ▁a ▁potentially ▁great ▁magnitude ▁if ▁he ▁or ▁she ▁had ▁a ▁reason ▁to ▁do ▁so , ▁e . g . ▁if ▁it ▁were ▁cost ▁prohib itive . ▁Lord ▁Re id ▁said ▁at ▁ 7 1 8 - 7 1 9 , ▁ ▁The ▁words ▁" real ▁risk " ▁are ▁the ▁requirement ▁of ▁rem oten ess ▁of ▁damage ▁but ▁the ▁test ▁of ▁for ese e ability ▁does ▁not ▁depend ▁upon ▁the ▁actual ▁risk ▁of