Željka Primorac, Marija Pijaca, Božena Bulum

OPENING/FALLING OF THE BOW VISOR/RAMP AS THE CAUSE OF MARITIME CASUALTIES – LIABILITY AND INSURANCE ASPECTS

Introduction

Opening/falling of the bow visor/ramp as the cause of maritime casualties – liability and insurance aspects. Examine maritime casualties caused by bow visor/ramp failures, focusing on liability and insurance aspects. Analyzes legal frameworks through 'Estonia' and 'Lastovo' incidents and the ISM Code.

Abstract

One of the fundamental determinants concerning the safety of maritime navigation is the need to comply with all safety standards of ship maintenance and safe working conditions, the nonfulfiilment or non-observance of which is considered a decisive factor in the occurrence of maritime casualties. In this article, the international, European and national normative legal issues of liability for damages and insurance cover are presented and explained using the example of two maritime casualties involving ro-ro passenger ships: 15-year old ship “Estonia” from 1994 (the accident occurred due to the opening of the bow visor during the navigation, which led to the sinking of the ship in international waters of the Baltic Sea and the death of 852 people) and the 55-year old ship “Lastovo” from 2024 (the accident occurred as a result of the fall of the bow ramp on a crew member at the pier, resulting in the death of 3 crew members and serious bodily injuries to 1 crew member). Although these are maritime accidents that occurred almost 30 years apart, they have a common link and raise questions about the (un)seaworthiness of the ship - which was established in the case of the maritime accident of the ship “Estonia” and seaworthiness of the ship which was established in the case of the maritime accident of the ship “Lastovo”. Given the above, the authors refer to the changes in the international and European legal framework (changes in ferry safety regulations, changes in liability and insurance cover regulations) that followed the „Estonia“ maritime casualties, and which, since a more comprehensive analysis was not possible, focussed exclusively on the damage suffered by passengers. At the same time, the national legal framework of liability and insurance coverage (according to the decisions of the Croatian Maritime Code, national Collective Agreement, Maritime Labour Convention, and P&I Club Rules) is considered in relation to damage caused by the death or physical injury of a „Lastovo“ crew member. The paper aims to discuss important issues related to the appropriate application of the International Safety Management Code (ISM Code), which was adopted immediately after the „Estonia“ maritime casualties, in order to ensure the safety of all operations related to the operation of the ship, including the prevention of injury or loss of life to passengers/crew members. Although the ISM Code does not regulate property liability issues, its non-application may be an important factor in determining the shipowner’s liability for all contractual and non-contractual obligations that may arise from the shipping operation and thus for the successful exercise of maritime insurance rights.

Review

This paper promises a timely and insightful examination into the liability and insurance implications stemming from failures of bow visors and ramps on maritime vessels, particularly ro-ro passenger ships. By focusing on two significant, albeit temporally distant, maritime casualties – the tragic sinking of the "Estonia" in 1994 and the fatal "Lastovo" accident in 2024 – the authors aim to highlight persistent safety challenges and the evolution of legal frameworks. The abstract effectively establishes the core argument that despite decades separating these incidents, they share a common thread concerning ship safety and the critical assessment of (un)seaworthiness, which forms the bedrock of discussions around culpability and compensation. A significant strength of this work lies in its comparative approach, juxtaposing a clear case of unseaworthiness ("Estonia") with one where seaworthiness was reportedly established ("Lastovo"), allowing for a nuanced exploration of liability and insurance landscapes. The paper is commendable for addressing international, European, and national normative legal issues, detailing the regulatory shifts that followed the "Estonia" disaster, such as changes in ferry safety regulations and the adoption of the International Safety Management (ISM) Code. Furthermore, the inclusion of the "Lastovo" accident provides a contemporary lens to analyze the application of current national legal frameworks, including the Croatian Maritime Code and P&I Club Rules, in cases involving crew member fatalities and injuries, demonstrating the practical implications of these complex legal instruments. While the abstract outlines a compelling premise, some areas could benefit from deeper exploration within the full paper. The statement that a "more comprehensive analysis was not possible" concerning passenger damages post-"Estonia" warrants further explanation, as it potentially limits the scope of the legal and insurance consequences discussed. Similarly, the finding of "seaworthiness" for "Lastovo" despite multiple fatalities due to equipment failure presents an intriguing paradox that demands thorough elucidation, particularly regarding how such a determination impacts liability and insurance outcomes for crew. A more explicit connection between ISM Code non-application and its concrete effects on shipowner liability and the successful exercise of maritime insurance rights, moving beyond a potential "important factor," would also enhance the paper's contribution. Nonetheless, this paper offers a valuable contribution to maritime safety and legal discourse, prompting important discussions on continuous improvement in an inherently risky industry.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.