Both-to-Blame Collision Clause

Introduction

When it comes to maritime law, there are various clauses and provisions that help protect the interests of all parties involved in a shipping transaction. One such clause is the “Both-to-Blame Collision Clause.” This clause is an important aspect of marine insurance and plays a crucial role in determining liability and compensation in the event of a collision at sea. In this article, we will explore the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause in detail, its purpose, how it works, and its implications for shipowners, insurers, and other stakeholders.

Understanding the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause

The Both-to-Blame Collision Clause is a provision commonly found in marine insurance policies. It is designed to allocate liability and determine the extent of compensation in cases where a collision occurs due to the fault of both vessels involved. The clause essentially limits the liability of the shipowner to a certain percentage, even if their vessel is partially at fault for the collision.

Under this clause, if both vessels are found to be at fault for the collision, the liability is divided between the shipowners based on a predetermined percentage. This predetermined percentage is often set at 50% for each vessel, but it can vary depending on the specific terms of the insurance policy. The clause ensures that the shipowner is not held fully responsible for the damages caused by the collision, even if their vessel contributed to the accident.

How Does the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause Work?

Let's consider a hypothetical scenario to understand how the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause works in practice:

Two vessels, Vessel A and Vessel B, collide at sea. Upon investigation, it is determined that both vessels were partially at fault for the collision. Vessel A is found to be 60% at fault, while Vessel B is found to be 40% at fault. If the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause is included in their insurance policies, the liability will be divided accordingly.

Based on the predetermined percentage set in the insurance policies, Vessel A's liability will be limited to 50% of the total damages, and Vessel B's liability will also be limited to 50% of the total damages. This means that even though Vessel A was more at fault, their liability is capped at 50%, providing some protection against excessive financial burden.

Implications for Shipowners and Insurers

The Both-to-Blame Collision Clause has significant implications for both shipowners and insurers:

1. Limiting Liability for Shipowners

For shipowners, the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause provides a degree of protection by limiting their liability in cases where their vessel is partially at fault for a collision. This clause ensures that shipowners are not unfairly burdened with the full responsibility for damages caused by a collision, especially when the fault is shared.

2. Impact on Insurance Premiums

The inclusion of the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause in marine insurance policies can have an impact on insurance premiums. Since the clause limits the liability of shipowners, insurers may adjust their premiums accordingly. Shipowners who have this clause in their insurance policies may benefit from lower premiums compared to those without it.

3. Encouraging Settlements

The Both-to-Blame Collision Clause can also encourage settlements between shipowners and insurers. Since the liability is predetermined and limited, it provides a clear framework for negotiation and settlement discussions. This can help expedite the claims process and avoid lengthy legal battles.

Case Study: The “Bowbelle” and “Marchioness” Collision

A notable case that involved the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause is the collision between the dredger “Bowbelle” and the pleasure boat “Marchioness” on the River Thames in 1989. The collision resulted in the tragic loss of 51 lives.

During the investigation, it was determined that both vessels were partially at fault for the collision. The “Bowbelle” was found to be 65% at fault, while the “Marchioness” was found to be 35% at fault. The Both-to-Blame Collision Clause was invoked, and the liability was divided accordingly.

However, this case highlighted some of the controversies surrounding the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause. Critics argued that the clause could lead to unfair outcomes, as it may not adequately reflect the level of fault or the severity of the damages caused by each vessel. This case prompted discussions and debates about the need for potential reforms in the application of the clause.

Conclusion

The Both-to-Blame Collision Clause is a crucial provision in marine insurance policies that helps allocate liability and determine compensation in cases where a collision occurs due to the fault of both vessels involved. While it provides a degree of protection for shipowners by limiting their liability, it has also been subject to criticism and debate.

Understanding the implications of the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause is essential for shipowners, insurers, and other stakeholders in the maritime industry. By considering the predetermined liability allocation and the potential impact on insurance premiums, shipowners can make informed decisions when selecting their insurance policies.

While the Both-to-Blame Collision Clause may not be perfect and can lead to controversies in certain cases, it serves as an important mechanism for resolving collision-related disputes and encouraging settlements. As the maritime industry continues to evolve, ongoing discussions and potential reforms may shape the future application of this clause.