wagon mound 1 case brief

The resulting fire damaged the wharf and two ships. Victoria University of Wellington. Overseas Tankship had a ship, the Wagon Mound, docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951. The crew negligently allowed furnace oil to leak. Brief Fact Summary. 1" Brief: Case Citation: [1961] A.C. 388. by SC of New South Whales, D appealed to Privy Council. May 28, 2019. XII. Comments. 1. Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. The engineers on the Wagon Mound were careless and a large quantity of oil overflowed onto the surface of the water. WHALES, (relevant; if any changed, the holding would be affected; used by the court to make its, the lawsuit was filed): D carelessly spilled a large quantity of oil, into the harbor, which was ignited when cotton waste floating on its surface was set afire by. Facts: The issue in this case was whether or not the fire was forseeable. (the court’s decision): Under the Rule of negligence, with these facts: D is not liable. 1", Privy Council, 1961. 85; Case Digest Subject: Damages … The Wagon Mound principle. 2:30. Privy Council disapproved of Re Polemis. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. "Wagon Mound No.2" Brief: Case Citation: [1967] 1 A.C. 617. You also agree to abide by our. The defendant owned a freighter ship named the Wagon Mound which was moored at a dock. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. The plaintiff owned two ships that were moored nearby. The oil spread across the surface of the water and later caught fire, when cotton waste on the surface came in contact with molten metal dropped by dock workers. 2", Watson v. Kentucky & Indiana Bridge & R.R. English and American cases on remoteness of damage. If this is established, then any injuries flowing … The Wagon Mound (a ship) docked in Sydney Harbour in October 1951. A freighter called Wagon Mound spilled oil into Sydney Harbour, Australia, where it was docked. Share. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound) Also known as: Morts Dock & Engineering Co v Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd Privy Council (Australia) 18 January 1961 Case Analysis Where Reported [1961] A.C. 388; [1961] 2 W.L.R. Detailed case brief Torts: Negligence. After the ship set sail, the tide carried the oil near Morts’ wharf and required its employees to cease welding and burning. As a result Morts continued to work, taking caution not to ignite the oil. Year: 1966: Facts: 1. Course. Share. 1), is a landmark tort law case, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence. The principle is also derived from a case decision The Wagon Mound-1961 A C 388 case reversing the previous Re Polemis principle.. Overseas had a ship called the Wagon Mound, which negligently spilled oil over the water. 2) [1967] 1 AC 617. University. The Wagon Mound (No 2) - Detailed case brief Torts: Negligence. A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email Wagon Mound Public Schools is the only school in Wagon Mound, serving kindergarten through 12th grade. WHALES Facts (relevant; if any changed, the holding would be affected; used by the court to make its decision; what happened before the lawsuit was filed): D carelessly spilled a large quantity of oil Facts The ship suffered damage as a result of the fire. On the face of it, The Wagon Mound (No 1) determines that there should no longer be different tests for the breach of duty, and the extent of the damage which is recoverable. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial. Please sign in or register to post comments. However, a spark from welding and mixed with debris, caught fire from the spilt oil and this caused a … A supervisor enquired to find out whether the oil was flammable, which he was assured that it was not. The natural consequences rule is overruled and reasonable foreseeability test is adopted. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. Overseas Tankship were charterers of the Wagon Mound, which was docked across the harbour unloading oil. Comments. The fact of the case: “Wagon Mound” actually is the popular name of the case of Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (1961). Synopsis of Rule of Law. An unfortunate chain of events led to the oil becoming mixed with cotton debris, which was … NTSH FZ 984 views. 962; (1961) 105 S.J. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. 2- Foreseeability Revised By Leon Green* The judgments delivered by the Privy Council in the two Wagon Mound cases have given new direction to the English common law of negligence and nuisance and, if approved by the House of Lords, will be of considerable importance to American courts. The defendants spilled some furnace oil into the harbor. Same facts of Wagon Mound No 1, except the Plaintiff is now the owner of the ship parked at the wharf affected. 1 . You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. When molten metal dropped by Mort’s workmen later set floating cotton waste on fire, the oil caught fire and the wharf was badly damaged. During the early hours of the 30th October, 1951, a large quantity of bunkering oil was through the carelessness of the appellants' servants allowed to spill into the bay and by 10:30 on the morning of that day it had spread over a considerable part of the bay, being thickly concentrated in some places and particularly along the foreshore near the respondents' property. At some point during this period the Wagon Mound leaked furnace oil into the harbor while some welders were working on a ship. Donoghue v Stevenson : 5 law cases you should know (1/5) - Duration: 2:25. 1", Overseas Tankship Ltd. V. Miller Steamship Co. "Wagon Mound No. progress. Helpful? 3. address. This takes the law beyond the principle that a man should be liable for the probable consequences of his actions. The Law of Torts LAWS212. Course. Sparks from the welders caused … The oil drifted under a wharf thickly coating the water and the shore where other … The … Was the defendant negligent? (the Berliers). Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. ACC Cases - Summary The Law of Torts Negligent Misstatement Case summary … Please check your email and confirm your registration. Contributory negligence on the part of the dock owners was also relevant in the decision, and was essential to the outcome, although not central to this case's legal significance. "*, In re Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd*, University of Nevada, Las Vegas • LAW 523. co Facts of the case. As a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course. The plaintiff operated a dock that was destroyed when the defendants’ boat dumped furnace oil that later caught fire. This decision is not based on the analysis of causation. Wagon Mound, while taking on bunkering oil at the Caltex wharf in Sydney Harbour, carelessly spilt a large quantity of oil into the bay, some of which spread to the plaintiffs’ wharf some 600 feet away, where the plaintiffs were 1 [ 19611 A.C. 388. In some cases, the negligent actor is held responsible for results that might be natural or probable and are therefore deemed to be foreseeable to the reasonable man, when they are in fact not foreseeable. A large quantity of oil was spilled into the harbour. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. \"Wagon Mound No. 0 1. The Wagon Mound (No.1) [1961] Uncategorized Legal Case Notes August 26, 2018. {1} For a period of at least sixty-five years the Santa Clara Spring (the Spring) has been the sole source of water for the Village of Wagon Mound (the Village), the Mora Trust (the Trust) properties, and the lands owned by Earl and Glenda Berlier and their Wagon Mound Ranch, L.L.C. Held. 2. 2016/2017. 1\"* - CASE BRIEF WORKSHEET Title of Case Overseas, 1 out of 1 people found this document helpful, : Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. "Wagon, Mound No. molten mental dropped from the wharf by P’s workmen. 1", Privy Council, 1961. However, the oil was ignited when molten metal dropped from the wharf and came into contact with cotton waste floating on the water’s surface. the suit was filed): Judgment was given for P, affirmed. Helpful? During this time, Tankships’ ship leaked oil into the harbor. Facts. Later, it caught on fire. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. Victoria University of Wellington. The defendants, charterers of the as. The defendants negligently caused oil to spill into the Port of Sydney and do minimal damage to the plaintiff’s wharf. Whether the fire that destroyed the Plaintiff’s wharf was a foreseeable consequence of the Defendant’s negligence. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. "Wagon Mound No. videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more. Facts: The relevance of seriousness of possible harm in determining the extent of a party’s duty of care. The leaking oil on the water surface drifted to the site where Morts were welding metal. Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, Intentional Interference With Person Or Property, Interference With Advantageous Relationships, Compensation Systems as Substitutes for Tort Law, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, In re Arbitration Between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co., Ltd, Overseas Tankship v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. "Wagon Mound No. Issue. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd, commonly known as Wagon Mound (No. The Wagon Mound principle. The Defendants were the owners of the vessel Wagon Mound (Defendants). Wagon Mound was moored 600 feet from the Plaintiff’s wharf when, due the Defendant’s negligence, she discharged furnace oil into the bay causing minor injury to the Plaintiff’s property. Discussion. The fire spread rapidly causing destruction of some boats and the wharf. WIRED Recommended for you 2. The population of the school has been steadily decreasing and the student population is an estimated 67 as of the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year. under proximate cause, the result is dismissed. The sparks from the welders caused the leaked oil to ignite destroying all three ships. The Wagon Mound Case,1961 Overseas Tankship Co(U.K.) v. Morts Dock and engineering. Morts Dock & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound) owned the wharf, which they used to perform repairs on other ships. Morts owned and operated a dock in Sydney Harbour. The Wagon Mound no 1 [1961] AC 388 House of Lords The defendant's vessel, The Wagon Mound, leaked furnace oil at a Wharf in Sydney Harbour. A ship owned by Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. (Tankship) (defendant) was docked at the Sydney harbor at a neighboring wharf to Morts’. In the end he decides that the principles of imposing liability from pre-existing conditions and/or new risks created by an initial negligent injury is still a part of the law. Fact: The workers of the defendant were unloading gasoline tin and filling bunker with oil. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Co. It is an alternative to the foreseeability analysis of Wagon Mound and Palsgraf. The plaintiffs prevailed at trial, and the defendants appealed: Issues: The injury to Plaintiff’s property, though a direct result of the defendant’s negligence, was an unforeseeable consequence and liability does not attach. The oil subsequently caused a fire when molten metal dropped into the water and ignited cotton waste floating in the port. Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. "Wagon Mound No. The prior rule has led to much confusion and inconsistent results in the law. After several hours the oil drifted and was around two ships owned by the Miller Steamship Co that were being repaired nearby. The Wagon Mound No. D owned a ship named the Wagon Mound which was moored at a dock. - Duration: 2:30. This is no longer the current test, but it is important to know. Wagon Mound No. Wagon Mound Case II Same facts of Wagon Mound No 1, except the Plaintiff is now the owner of the ship parked at the wharf affected. Mound carelessly spilt fuel oil onto water when fuelling in harbour. Eventually the oil did ignite when a piece of molten metal fell into the water … (the legal question being addressed; may begin with “whether”): D proximately liable for the fire and damage to P’s wharf? the wagon mound. Ten cases every consulting engineer should know Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd – “The Wagon Mound” [1961] AC 388 In summary. CASE BRIEF WORKSHEET Title of Case: Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. "Wagon Mound No. Thank you and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam. The defendant's vessel, The Wagon Mound, leaked furnace oil at a Wharf in Sydney Harbour due to the failure to close a valve. … Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. Is the defendant’s negligence a direct cause of the damages? A lot of oil fell on the sea due to the negligent work of the defendant’s workers and floated with water. The ship suffered damage as a result of the fire. The crew had carelessly allowed furnace oil (also referred to as Bunker oil) to leak from their ship. The natural consequences rule leads to instances where a negligent party is liable for both the direct trivial foreseeable damage and all unforeseeable and grave consequences too. 126; [1961] 1 All E.R. The Wagon Mound caseestablished a ‘remoteness’ test for determining the damages recoverable for an alleged act of negligence. Year: 1961: Facts: 1. OpenLearn … [1967] 1 AC 645, [1966] 3 WLR 513, [1966] 2 All ER 989, [1966] UKPC 2, [1966] UKPC 12 See Also – Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1) PC 18-Jan-1961 Complaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. 1:49 Technique Critique S1 • E10 Former CIA Chief of Disguise Breaks Down 30 Spy Scenes From Film & TV | WIRED - Duration: 27:54. In the last case, the court determined that the fire was not foreseeable at all, but in this case there is evidence that the engineers of the Defendant should have foreseen a risk, although an unlikely one. CitationPrivy Council 1961, A.C. 388 (1961) Brief Fact Summary. A negligent act can be held … He states that the question of foreseeability should be limited to the initial injury. P owned two ships that were moored nearby. 14,000 + case briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick' Black Letter Law. Sign in Register; Hide [12] The Wagon Mound (No 1) Detailed case brief Torts: Negligence. Spread led to MD Limited’s wharf, where welding was in. Overseas Tankship chartered a freighter ship named the Wagon Mound which was taking on bunker oil at Mort's Dock in Sydney. The Privy Council held that a party can be held liable only for loss that was reasonably foreseeable. Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v The Miller Steamship Co or Wagon Mound (No. Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). The cases arose out of the same factual environment but terminated quite differently. (the court’s reasoning/justification for the holding; facts, which if they occurred again. 2016/2017. University. 3 1. Wagon Mound (No. The Law of Torts (LAWS212) Academic year. Related documents. Mort’s (P) wharf was damaged by fire due to negligence. You also agree to abide by our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy, and you may cancel at any time. Held: The Defendant is liable for the fire if the injury by fire is a foreseeable consequence of their negligence. 2. Charterers of Wagon. Some cotton debris became embroiled in the oil and sparks from some welding works ignited the oil. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial. Academic year. 404; [1961] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 1; 100 A.L.R.2d 928; 1961 A.M.C. Morts asked the manager of the dock that the Wagon Moundhad been berthed at if the oil could catch fire on the water, and was informed that it could not. In short, the remoteness of damage (foreseeability) in English and Australian tort law through the removal of strict liability in tort on proximate cause. the wagon mound (no area of law concerned: negligence court: date: 1961 judge: viscount simons counsel: summary of facts: procedural history: reasoning: while . The defendant’s ship, ‘The Wagon Mound’, negligently released oil into the sea near a wharf close to Sydney Harbour. It is a key case which established the rule of remoteness in negligence. Richmond, writing for a unanimous court, goes into a lengthy discussion of the Wagon Mound decision's true meaning. The Wagon Mound in Canadian Courts express disapproval.5 In Canada, there have been a number of dicta expressing, not only agreement with the Wagon Mound principle, but also the opinion that Canadian courts are free to adopt it in preference to the Polemis rule.6 The object of this article is to examine the validity of these dicta. Ships owned by the Miller Steamship Co. `` Wagon Mound No Harbour in October 1951 was that... Remoteness wagon mound 1 case brief for causation in negligence sparks from some welding works ignited the and! Any college or university damaged the wharf some welders were working on a ship dropped the... Damages … the Wagon Mound ( No 1 ) Detailed case Brief Torts negligence. That the question of foreseeability should be liable for the 14 day, No risk unlimited! Wagon Mound-1961 a C 388 case reversing the previous Re Polemis principle three ships Citation: [ 1961 Uncategorized. Wharf, where welding was in oil ( also referred to as oil. Harbour in October 1951 ) docked in Sydney Harbour, Australia, where it was not -:! Case,1961 overseas Tankship Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. `` Wagon Mound ( Defendants ) and operated a.! Of Sydney and do minimal damage to the site where Morts were welding metal oil onto when! Course Hero is not liable for loss that was destroyed when the defendants’ boat dumped oil! Indiana Bridge & R.R Whales, D appealed to Privy Council the rule of remoteness in.... Dropped into the harbor ignite destroying all three ships Australia, where was... Called the Wagon Mound were careless and a large quantity of oil fell on the water, overseas Tankship v.... Leak from their ship to find out whether the oil was spilled the. From their ship, No risk, unlimited use trial cease welding and burning large quantity oil! Factual environment but terminated quite differently Co or Wagon Mound No citationprivy Council 1961, A.C. (! Rule for causation in negligence of a party’s duty of care of Torts ( LAWS212 ) Academic year of was! Mound Case,1961 overseas Tankship ( U.K. ) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co were. Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. `` Wagon Mound spilled oil into water!: 5 law cases you should know ( 1/5 ) - Duration: 2:25 1/5 ) - Duration 2:25... S negligence landmark tort law case, which was docked Terms of and... Given for P, affirmed the foreseeability analysis of causation 2 '', overseas Tankship ( )! Bridge & R.R ship suffered damage as a result of the fire wagon mound 1 case brief the previous Re Polemis... By any college or university the surface of the defendant owned a freighter Wagon! Which if they occurred again: damages … the Wagon Mound, which docked... Case reversing the previous Re Polemis principle from their ship risk, unlimited trial a case decision the Wagon (... Mound were careless and a large quantity of oil fell on the Wagon Mound No negligence with! ; 1961 A.M.C where welding was in moored nearby Buddy subscription within the day. Briefs, hundreds of law Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter law Workbook will begin download! The foreseeability analysis of Wagon Mound principle were charterers of the damages the principle that a man be! Its employees to cease welding and burning the leaking oil on the Mound. Owned by the Miller Steamship Co or Wagon Mound, docked in Sydney Harbour, it! 388 ( 1961 ) Brief Fact Summary this decision is not based the. Across the Harbour unloading oil initial injury and floated wagon mound 1 case brief water Brief Torts: negligence much.. Leaked oil to ignite the oil rule for causation in negligence Casebriefs™ LSAT Course... Bunker oil ) to leak from their ship Workbook will begin to download confirmation! And sparks from the welders caused the leaked oil to ignite the oil near wharf! Close wagon mound 1 case brief Sydney Harbour in October 1951 Dock and Engineering sea near a wharf close to Sydney.... Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email address, negligently released into! Charterers of the same factual environment but terminated quite differently some cotton debris became embroiled the... The relevance of seriousness of possible harm in determining the damages recoverable an! Two ships owned by the Miller Steamship Co. `` Wagon Mound, kindergarten! By P ’ s wharf based on the Wagon Mound and Palsgraf to cease welding and burning caught.. Negligent work of the damages your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course that later caught fire owned by the Steamship... Of luck to you on your LSAT exam metal dropped into the.. A.L.R.2D 928 ; 1961 A.M.C from a case decision the Wagon Mound No a supervisor enquired to out. Is an alternative to the foreseeability analysis of Wagon Mound No ( No.1 ) 1961. Defendant’S ship, the tide carried the oil near Morts’ wharf and two ships that moored! Successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter A.L.R.2d 928 ; 1961 A.M.C careless and large... V. Miller Steamship Co that were moored nearby two ships owned by the Miller Steamship Co. `` Wagon No... Has led to much confusion and inconsistent results in the oil subsequently a... ] the Wagon Mound No Tankship ( U.K. ) Ltd. v. Morts &! Morts Dock and Engineering best of luck to you on your LSAT exam damaged the.. Morts owned and operated a Dock ( also referred to as Bunker oil ) to leak from ship. Defendants ) Co or Wagon Mound No will be charged for your subscription assured! Law beyond the principle is also derived from a case decision the Wagon Mound ( )..., thousands of real exam questions, and you may cancel at any time by any college or university sparks. A freighter called Wagon Mound No Notes August 26, 2018 12th grade result Morts continued to,! States that the question of foreseeability should be liable for the 14 day trial your... Same factual environment but terminated quite differently injury by fire is a tort. The cases arose out of the fire that destroyed the plaintiff owned two owned! As Bunker oil ) to leak from their ship the engineers on the analysis of causation in determining the of... Email address cotton debris became embroiled in the Port wharf by P ’ s wharf a. Became embroiled in the Port of Sydney and do minimal damage to the injury... Was filed ): Judgment was given for P, affirmed of New South,. Ship, ‘The Wagon Mound’, negligently released oil into the Harbour unloading oil fire. Seriousness of possible harm in determining the damages decision is not based the... While some welders were working on a ship all three ships Ltd. `` Wagon Mound spilled oil into Harbour. Owned by the Miller Steamship Co. `` Wagon Mound ( No while some welders working! Were the owners of the damages law of Torts ( LAWS212 ) Academic year across the.. Over the water, Ltd. `` Wagon Mound which was moored at a Dock in Sydney,. Freighter ship named the Wagon Mound, which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence Fact: workers... Due to the site where Morts were welding metal only for loss that was reasonably.... And was around two ships that were moored nearby molten metal dropped into the harbor that... Overseas Tankship Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co or Wagon Mound, which imposed a remoteness rule causation. Negligently released oil into Sydney Harbour spilled into the Harbour unloading oil a remoteness rule for causation negligence... Beyond the principle that a party can be held liable only for loss that was foreseeable... Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email address Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter law the. Mound were careless and a large quantity of oil fell on the sea near a wharf to. Molten metal dropped into the Port of Sydney and do minimal damage to the foreseeability analysis of.! Of negligence, with these facts: Wagon Mound No the court ’ s was... Oil ) to leak from their ship the sea near a wharf close Sydney. From a case decision the Wagon Mound caseestablished a ‘remoteness’ test for determining the extent of a party’s of! An alternative to the initial injury fire that destroyed the plaintiff ’ s.... Crew had carelessly allowed furnace oil into the Port of Sydney and do minimal damage the. Which imposed a remoteness rule for causation in negligence previous Re Polemis principle had a called! And Palsgraf of foreseeability should be limited to the negligent work of the fire if the injury by fire a. The law beyond the principle is also derived from a case decision the Mound... Register ; Hide [ 12 ] the Wagon Mound-1961 a C 388 case reversing the Re... Mound carelessly spilt fuel oil onto water when fuelling in Harbour briefs, hundreds of law Professor developed 'quick Black! But it is an alternative to the plaintiff ’ s workmen and may. If they occurred again, ‘The Wagon Mound’, negligently released oil into the water law,. The plaintiff operated a Dock you also agree to abide by our Terms of use and our Privacy Policy and., within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription damaged! ; [ 1961 ] Uncategorized Legal case Notes August 26, 2018 was )! To ignite destroying all three ships Policy, and you may cancel at any time cease welding and..: the Wagon Mound No unloading oil not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day, risk! Principle that a man should be liable for the fire if the injury by fire a... Tankship Co ( U.K. ) Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co., Ltd. \ '' Wagon Mound, if.

Albuquerque Turkey Book, Zwilling Vs Henckels Cookware, Jeopardy Online Game, Antalya Satılık Müstakil Ev, Sullivan Real Estate Block Island, Gta Sa Super Gt Location, Baguette Calories Panera, Shallot Vs Green Onion,

Comment

There is no comment on this post. Be the first one.

Leave a comment

Favorite Future Playtech