Posted on 03/26/2024 11:32:12 PM PDT by nickcarraway
The owner of the Singapore-flagged ship that rammed into a Baltimore bridge could face hundreds of millions of dollars in damage claims after the accident sent vehicles plunging into the water and threw the eastern US transportation network into chaos.
But legal experts said there is a path for reducing liability under an obscure 19th-century law once invoked by the owner of the Titanic to limit its payout for the 1912 sinking.
At the centre of the legal fallout will be Singapore-based Grace Ocean, owner of the container ship Dali that crashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge on March 26 at the start of a voyage chartered by the shipping giant Maersk.
(Excerpt) Read more at straitstimes.com ...
If you play it backwards, Paul is dead...
The executives who require container ship builders to build junk, are in trouble.
The notion that trade over the high seas, can occur using glorified barges, is in trouble.
ALL bridges that are not protected, are in trouble.
I don’t think any vehicles fell into the water
>>Lutine bell
Really enjoyed your link. Thanks for the history post.
At least 6 vehicles - see them in the video, to your right of the center of the center bridge span
https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1772515766929097088
. . . plunged down with the bridge structure.
That statement was a lie. The new bridge wull certainly be a toll bridge
IMHO there needs to be a criminal investigation first & foremost.
The results of that investigation will set the stage for liability over the lost lives.
If there is an old law which limits liability to the carrier, we should renew focus on the jobs of our elected representatives (who apparently believe their only job is to draft new spending bills and make new laws).
There should be no limit on the carrier’s liability.
Agree. Our transportation infrastructure is seriously outdated and in bad shape nationwide.
But as long as the guy in charge, - who knows nothing about transportation and has no experience - is gay, it’s all good with the Dems.
It is impossible to ‘upgrade’ bridge supports to survive an impact with such a vessel.
“Physics.”
The vessel was traveling too fast (IMHO) and was grossly off course. Investigators will learn why.
If this incident sinks the operator of the vessel, so be it.
I find it odd that no one is considering the nature of the crews which operate most of these ships...
Speed is not the problem
Momentum and inertia are the problem
And just like that the Russian music hall killings are off the front page. Life moves fast, so much information and bad news every stinking day. Stay well everyone.
Law? There is no rule of law in the U.S. Just look at what is going on with Trump!
Fascinating reading. Thank you. The history of Lloyd’s is long and engaging for those with interest in ships and such.
since the channel was strait at that point, her rudder was probably close to centerline when electrical power was lost.
When a single propeller ship has head way on and a backing bell on, the ship will veer to starboard. No electricity, no rudder control. On Naval vessels, there is a mechanical means of moving the rudder if electricity is not available. Do not know if commercial ships have this feature.
FR is getting more stupid every day.
Here’s another good one. See if you can find the history of Admiral Nelson’s silver services that are also on display on the floor at Lloyd’s, near the bell.
It is easily foreseeable that such an accident would eventually happen
Hindsight has the illusion of being 20-20.
So the liability is equal to the value of the ship plus the value of any cargo fees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.