The owner of the submarine cable claimed damages from three defendants. The owner argued that the defendants were jointly liable for having caused the damage with qualified gross negligence or that they were liable as owner or operator of the vessel. The defendants argued, inter alia, that none of them was to be regarded as the operator of the vessel, but rather that it was another company which was not a party in the case.
In Sweden there is a long tradition of referring to a person who operates a ship as a “redare”. The main question in the Supreme Court was thus who is to be regarded as “redare” and thus liable as such for the damage according to the Swedish Maritime Code. The case also raised the question of what could constitute qualified gross negligence.
- It is not always easy to determine who is the ”redare”, says Svante O. Johansson, Justice of the Supreme Court. Today, there is often a division of different functions in operating a ship and the question of who is liable for damage must be decided through an overall assessment of the circumstances of the specific case, he continues. The ”redare” is then considered to be the one on whom the majority of the typical ship operating functions rest, he concludes.
In this case, the Supreme Court found that none of the defendants themselves acted with such qualified gross negligence as alleged by the owner of the undersea cable. On the other hand, the Court concluded that the majority of the typical ship operating functions were the responsibility of one of the defendants. In other words, he is solely liable for the damage caused to the cable by the captain and crew as a result of the fault or negligence in their service on the vessel.
The judgment was delivered on 14th November 2023.
Case No: T 6909-22 “Baltic Cable”
Contact
Name: Charlotta Hallgren
Title: Judge referee
Email: charlotta.hallgren@dom.se