An Admiralty Swansong (Video)

• Published date: 06 October 2020
• Law Firm: Quadrant Chambers
• Author: Mr James Turner

OVERVIEW

End of an era as Teare J retires as Admiralty Judge with one last collision judgment.

self

This morning, 5 October 2020, Sir Nigel Teare handed down judgment in a three-handed collision dispute: Sakizaya Kalon & Osios David v Panamax Alexander [2020] EWHC 2604 (Admlty). This was Sir Nigel's last case as Admiralty Judge, a post he has held for more than a decade - the fourth member of what is now Quadrant Chambers to do so in succession, following Sir David Steel, Lord Clarke and Sir Barry Sheen.

In the years between Sir Barry's and Sir Nigel's retirements, collision actions have altered almost beyond recognition. In Sir Barry's last case, The Vegaland v The Coral Essberger (1993, unreported), computers had yet to intrude at all (other than as word processors). Plots of the navigation for which each side contended were still prepared with pencil on graph paper, often with the assistance of expert master mariners such as the great Norman Cockcroft. And the real focus of the forensic dispute was to establish where and how the vessels had come into collision.

Fast forward three decades. The advent and (nowadays) ubiquity of VDR, AIS and ECDIS mean that - once the computers have done their work interpreting the data - it is now vanishingly rare for there to be a dispute of substance regarding where and how the vessels collided. The focus has instead shifted to why they did. The availability of bridge audio recordings has opened up previously unthinkable vistas for cross-examination of mariners as to their lookout, assessment of risk of collision and ship-handling. (Of course, the preparation of the necessary transcripts, which often involve translation from two or more languages, is time-consuming, expensive and contentious, requiring a high level of co-operation between the parties and robust case management.)

In the opening paragraphs of his lengthy, detailed and careful judgment, the judge reflected on these changes in collision disputes, remarking that " . the wealth of material contained in the VDR audio record provides much scope for detailed submissions (and cross-examination) as to why a vessel was navigated as she was, which submissions can be relevant to, but not determinative of, questions of fault and can also be relevant to the degree of blameworthiness. In the present case counsel's closing written submissions totalled some 176 pages".

The other intrusion of technology into the case concerned the format of the trial. As a result of the...