WILFORCE LLC & Anor v RATU SHIPPING CO.SA & Anor

WILFORCE LLC & Anor v RATU SHIPPING CO.SA & Anor

WESTERN MOSCOW was primarily at fault for the collision due to poor lookout, improper navigation, and failure to take appropriate action to avoid collision, while WILFORCE was also at fault for proceeding at an unsafe speed and failing to reduce speed in time. The causative potency and blameworthiness of WESTERN MOSCOW were greater, justifying an apportionment of liability of 75% to WESTERN MOSCOW and 25% to WILFORCE.

Parties
Claimant: Wilforce LLC; Claimant: Awilco LNG AS; Defendant: Ratu Shipping Co. SA; Defendant: Sea Queen Shipping Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Collision Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Liability apportioned 75% to WESTERN MOSCOW and 25% to WILFORCE.
Legal Topics
Collision Regulations, Apportionment of Liability, Precautionary Area Navigation, Lookout and Safe Speed, Crossing Rule Application
Admiralty Maritime Law Collision Regulations Apportionment of Liability Precautionary Area Navigation Lookout and Safe Speed Crossing Rule Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wilforce LLC

Claimant

Awilco LNG AS

Claimant

Ratu Shipping Co. SA

Defendant

Sea Queen Shipping Corporation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Collision Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether WESTERN MOSCOW or WILFORCE was primarily at fault for the collision
  2. 2 Whether the crossing rules applied when the crossing situation was created by the stand-on vessel's own fault
  3. 3 What actions each vessel ought to have taken as a matter of good seamanship and under the Collision Regulations

Ratio Decidendi

WESTERN MOSCOW was primarily at fault for the collision due to poor lookout, improper navigation, and failure to take appropriate action to avoid collision, while WILFORCE was also at fault for proceeding at an unsafe speed and failing to reduce speed in time. The causative potency and blameworthiness of WESTERN MOSCOW were greater, justifying an apportionment of liability of 75% to WESTERN MOSCOW and 25% to WILFORCE.

Court Disposition

Liability apportioned 75% to WESTERN MOSCOW and 25% to WILFORCE.

Orders

  • Judgment for claimants and defendants in agreed proportions of liability: 75% to WESTERN MOSCOW, 25% to WILFORCE.
  • Costs and damages to be assessed in accordance with the apportionment.