Tenes/Darion
(Queen’s Bench Division (Admiralty Court) June 7, 8 and 9, 1989. Before Mr.Justice Sheen, Assisted by Captain D. J. Cloke and Captain D. J. Orr, Trinity Masters.)
Collison-Crossing vessels-Collision in Mediterranean Sea-Plaimtiff’s vessel sank-Faults in navigation-Vessels Proceeding at excessive speed-Apportionment of liability.
On June 7, 1983 at about 02 20 hours a collision occurred between the plaintiff’s German ship Darion and the defendant’s Algerian ship Tenes in the Mediterranean
Darion was engaged in a laden voyage from Antwerp to Skikda and was proceeding in an easterly direction along the coast of Algeria. Tenes was engaged in a ballast voyage from Skikda to Mers El Kebir and was proceeding in a westerly direction along that coast. Both ships were proceeding in dense fog for several hours before and up to the collision.
Before the events which led immediately to the collision Tenes was proceeding on a course of 261 deg. At a speed of 15 knots. Her engines were stopped shortly before the collision. As Darion sank as a result of the collision there was no evidence as to the course of Darion before action was taken in relation to the approach of Tenes. But having regard to the voyage she was engaged on it was clear that her course must have been a course opposite to that of Tenes or within a few degrees thereof. Her speed was not less than 10 knots.
The collision occurred between the stem and bulbous bow of Tenes and port side of Darion. The angle between the ships at collision was an angle leading forward on Darion.
Both ships failed to comply with the rules contained in the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea which provided inter alia:
8(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided.
19(b) Every vessel shall proceed at a safe speed adapted to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of restricted visibility. A power-driven vessel shall have her engines ready for immediate manoeuvre.
Held, by Q.B. (Adm. Ct.)(Sheen, J.), that (1) there were periods when the mate was the only man on the bridge of Darion which was on automatic steering in dense fog; if the master felt unable to remain on the bridge he should not have left until he was fully satisfied that the mate understood that it was his duty to take positive action to avoid a close quarter situation; the instructions which the master gave to the mate were unclear, unseamanlike and contrary to the Collision Regulation; (2) the mate made two small alterations to starboard; it was quite apparent that the made did not appreciate that by altering course to starboard he was putting Darion on a crossing course and that because Tenes was proceeding at a higher speed than Darion,Tenes would if each vessel maintained its course, cross ahead of Darion; (3) Tenes should not have been proceeding at more than 10 knots with her engines ready for immediate manoeuvre and Darion should not have been proceeding at more than eight knots; neither vessel was proceeding at a safe speed as was required by r. 19(b) of Collision Regulations; (4) both ships were proceeding at excessive speed after the presence of the other was known and in this respect Tenes was more at fault than Darion; but the real mischief which created the close quarters situation was the fact that Darion made two small alterations of course to starboard which would not have been readily apparent to Tenes; it was the breach of r. 8(b) by Darion which created the very close quarters situation and a ship which created the difficulties inherent in such a situation should in general bear the greater proportion of the blame; Darion was 60 percent. To blame for the collision and Tenes 40 percent.