The Titanic Law
The owner of the Singapore-flagged ship that rammed into a Baltimore bridge could face hundreds of millions of dollars in damage claims after the accident sent vehicles plunging into the water and threw the eastern US transportation network into chaos.
The company could face a bevy of lawsuits from multiple directions, including from the bridge’s owner and anyone who sues for personal injury or emotional distress. Damages claims are likely to fall on the ship owner and not the agency that operates the bridge, since stationary objects are not typically at fault if a moving vessel hits them, said Michael Sturley, a maritime law expert at the University of Texas at Austin’s School of Law.
But an 1851 law could lower the exposure to tens of millions of dollars by capping the ship owner’s liability at how much the vessel is worth after the crash, plus any earnings it collected from carrying the freight on board, said Martin Davies, the director of Tulane University’s Maritime Law Centre.
The law was passed initially to prevent shipping giants from suffering steep and insurmountable losses from disasters at sea. An eight-figure sum, while still hefty, would amount to “considerably less” than the full claims total, Davies said.
“It’s a very unusual casualty in one respect, particularly because of this footage of the whole bridge falling down,” Davies said. “But in many ways, it’s not unusual, because ships collide and there’s damage and there’s injury all the time.”
Lawrence B. Brennan, an adjunct professor of law at Fordham University School of Law in New York and an expert on admiralty and maritime law, said he assumes the Dali’s operator will shortly begin a proceeding in the US under the 1851 law, which was cited by the Titanic’s owner in a Supreme Court case more than a century ago.
The ship owner’s insurance would help the company through the legal risks. About 90 percent of the world’s ocean-bound cargo is insured by an arm of the International Group of Protection and Indemnity Clubs, which oversees the 12 major mutual insurance associations for ship owners.
US Constitution
While federal courts have jurisdiction over maritime disputes, any victims of the bridge strike could potentially seek damages under a clause of the US Constitution that allows those injured in accidents at sea or who have property claims to pursue lawsuits in state court, said Charles A. Patrizia, who heads an American Bar Association committee on marine law.
In cases like these, businesses often sue for interruption, claiming economic losses. Those cases are rarely successful due to a law that largely limits the award of monetary damages to people who were physically injured, said Sturley, the UT Austin professor.
And what will become of the ship itself, whose owner Grace Ocean, Singapore, is a unit of Mitsui & Co., and manager was Singapore-based Synergy Marine Group?
The ship’s owner may want to get it out of the US, but the Maryland Transportation Authority will likely seek to keep it under “arrest” while it pursues claims - and possibly until damages are resolved, said Brennan, the Fordham professor.
Conclusion
Above all legal analysis we must understand the pure human tragedy this is and pray for those involved and their families. No discussion on this topic should start without a recognition of the impact, both directly and indirectly the collision has had. That impact extends to not just those off the ship, but also on it. Collisions occur more than reported, however they also happen with cars, trains, buses, and on and on, but a huge vessel creates a huge collision. If every time an act of negligence, mechanical failure, accident occurred hundreds of millions or billions was allowed to be sued over, and businesses were shut down, then 90% of the World's commerce would end. Image the impact that reverberation would have on the world's economy and the people that rely on those shipments to run their businesses, to live, or simply to eat.
We may emotionally want to punish someone or get them back for the act they did in negligence (which means without intent), but two things we must always remember:
1. What is the impact of our punishment on society; and
2. What if that was you (or your child) who unintentionally created the harm?
What is JUST is necessary to have JUSTICE. The law is perspective from all angles - not just the one you choose. Should you need JUSTICE or simply some PERSPECTIVE, give WINSLOW LAW a call: 843-357-9301.
May God Bless You, Your Business, The United States of America, and Happy Easter!
For He has Risen,
Tom Winslow
