A recent case highlighted the importance of investigating surrounding circumstances when facing an unexplained loss.

A cruise ship was moored at a terminal in Mexico during a hurricane warning. During this time, due to the pressure exerted by the mooring lines, one of the berth’s dolphins was detached from its position, removing the entire structure from its concrete pillars. In preliminary findings, the appointed investigator highlighted three potential causes: pre-existing wear and tear; a previous unreported incident; or unsafe mooring practices. However, later investigations revealed regular maintenance and no previous incidents.    

Having ruled out material fatigue and maintenance issues, our attention turned to the mooring arrangements (design, distribution). It was later discovered that the distribution of mooring lines was inadequate, resulting in imbalanced pressure on different parts of the ship. Even in relatively calm conditions the ship faced additional pressure from nominal currents and onshore winds which should have been taken into consideration when deciding to leave the ship moored.

The combined effect of the unbalanced distribution of the existing lines and the lack of monitoring by the crew led to excessive pressure in the most westerly located dolphin, detaching it from its concrete pillars.

According to the master’s statement, the mooring was conducted as per ‘standard practice and good seamanship’. This statement was simply not enough to provide evidence of a safe Mooring Arrangement Plan.

In lengthy claims, once damage and causation are established, the burden shifts to the defendants to demonstrate due care. In this case the owners failed to prove the adequacy of the Mooring Arrangement Plan, crew monitoring or any possible cause relieving them of liability related to the loss. From a recovery standpoint, the owners were faced with at least an arguable case of lack of due care and an out-of-court settlement was a better option.

Read the full article here.