An Introduction To Maritime Law Presumptions

• Published date: 25 March 2024
• Subject Matter: Transport, Marine/ Shipping
• Law Firm: Liskow & Lewis
• Author: Jessie Elizabeth Shifalo and Elizabeth Strunk

Maritime law has many unique characteristics that differentiate it from state and federal law. One of these characteristics is the application of presumptions of fault, causation, and the condition of property, which shifts the burden of proof from one party to the other. These presumptions can be a powerful tool for a knowledgeable litigant, and a pitfall for the unwary.

Collisions & Allisions

There are three key presumptions in collision law.

• The Louisiana Rule and Oregon Rule are relatively similar and can be likened to res ispa loquitur because they create a rebuttable presumption of negligence or fault for the casualty
  • Louisiana Rule is when an unmoored, drifting vessel allides with an anchored vessel or a navigational structure, the moving vessel is presumptively at fault. The Louisiana, 70 U.S 164 (1866).
  • Oregon Rule is when a vessel under its own power allides with an anchored vessel or a navigational structure. The moving vessel carries the burden of proving the absence of fault. The Oregon, 158 U.S. 186 (1895).

• The Pennsylvania Rule applies when a ship, at the time of a collision, is in actual violation of a statutory rule, intended to prevent collisions. The Rule does not establish fault but is a reasonable presumption that the fault was the sole or a contributory cause of the disaster. For the rule to be applied, there must be proof that there was a violation of a statute, the statute must involve marine safety or navigation and the injury must be of the nature that the statute intended to prevent. The Pennsylvania, 86 U.S. 125 (1874). To overcome this presumption, the violating vessel must not only prove that the violation of a statute did not cause the collision or allision but also, that the violation could not have contributed to the incident at all. The Pennsylvania Rule can also be applied outside the context of collision cases, for instance in a Jones Act personal injury case. The Fifth Circuit has gone so far as to hold that the Rule applies to any "statutory violator who is party to a maritime accident." Pennzoil Producing Co. v. Offshore Express, Inc., 943 F.2d 1465, 1472 (5th Cir. 1991) (citation omitted); see also U.S. v. Nassau Marine Corp., 778 F.2d 1111, 1116 (5th Cir. 1985) ("The [Pennsylvania] Rule does not apply only to collisions.").

Cargo Loss & Damage

In cargo loss or damage cases, the cargo claimant must establish that the cargo was received by the carrier in good condition (also known as "good order") and...