Skip to main content

Maritime Law-M/T PRESTIGE Captain Innocent of Environmental Crime

As reported late last week in various news sources including the Maritime Executive, a Spanish court found the crew of the M/T PRESTIGE and the Spanish Merchant Navy not guilty of criminal responsibility of the sinking of the oil tanker on November 13, 2002. It was Spain's worst ever environmental disaster. The PRESTIGE sank off Spain’s northwestern coast and polluted thousands of miles of coastline and beaches in Spain, France and Portugal - prompting Spain to close its fishing grounds for about six months. The tanker was transporting about 77,000 metric tons of heavy fuel oil on board.

Picture taken from www.crcco.com 


Initially, the ship’s master Apostolos Mangouras requested a place of refuge for the tanker, which had a crack in its hull. But Spanish, French and Portuguese authorities denied the ship sanctuary. The Spanish authorities instructed the captain to take his ship further out to sea. After a storm damaged one of its fuel tanks, the ship drifted for days. The integrity of the ship's single-hull quickly deteriorated, and a severe storm eventually broke the starboard hull off the ship and subsequently spilled her entire cargo off Spain’s coast. Mangouras was taken into custody for "not cooperating" with salvage crews and causing environmental damage.

After an 11-year judicial investigation, the Galician region's high court said in a verdict and sentence that the disaster was partly due to the 26-year-old tanker's poor state of repair. Three judges of the Galician Spanish High Court concluded it was impossible to establish criminal responsibility and Captain Mangouras, Chief Engineer Nikolaos Argyropoulos and the former head of Spain's Merchant Navy, Jose Luis Lopez, were found not guilty of crimes against the environment. Lopez was the only government official charged in the case. Mangouras, 78, was found guilty of a lesser charge of disobedience and given a nine month suspended sentence.

The judges noted the leak was caused by deficient maintenance which the court found the crew did not know about. The captain was accused of disobeying government authorities who wanted the 26-year-old tanker as far from the coast as possible. The court found that decision to be a correct one. 

Spain also attempted to sue the classification society ABS for the condition of the ship, but failed to win that attempt. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that Spain did not provide sufficient evidence to take the case back to trial and clearing ABS of all charges. That court stated: "We conclude that we need not resolve the question whether a classification society may be held liable in tort to a third party such as Spain for reckless conduct in connection with the classification of vessels. Rather, we assume arguendo for purposes of this appeal that Defendants did owe the claimed duty to Spain. In our view, Spain has nonetheless failed to adduce sufficient evidence to create a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Defendants recklessly breached that duty such that their actions constituted a proximate cause of the wreck of the Prestige."
 
If you are interested in contacting me, you may do so by writing to me at mov@chaloslaw.com.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ReThink + ReUse Center "It's How We Roll" Fun Raiser -- Bowling Night -- October 16, 2014

As many of my readers may be aware, I am the Chair of the ReThink + ReUse Center, a non-for-profit educational and environmental Center in Miami educating children into rethinking reuseable materials for learning through play. The ReThink and ReUse Center’s Quality Play is Learning Program provides a series of educational and participatory workshops based on the philosophies of Reggio Emilia and Harvard's Project Zero Visible Thinking. The Children’s Trust is the major funder of this program, but the Center is required to continually fundraise for the balance its annual budget.   The Center is having a fun event you are invited to--the ReThink + Reuse Center’s “It’s How We Roll” bowling event on October 16, 2014 at Splitsville Luxury Lanes from 18:00 to 21:30 hours. My firm, Comcast and Waste Management are major sponsors for this event, but we could use a few more sponsors. If you are interested in sponsoring the event, please let me know by reaching me at mov@chalos...
6 comments
Read more

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector.       The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl...
4 comments
Read more

Maritime Law--Lozman Case Revisited in Miami?

In Hoefling v. City of Miami , Case no.: 14-12482 (11th Cir. Jan. 25, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit revived almost all of Hoefling's claims. You ask, "Who is Hoefling?" Hoefling  lived on his sailboat Metis O moored off Dinner Key for nearly a decade—until the day he came home and it was gone. About three months earlier, an officer from the Miami Police Department's Marine Patrol Detail tagged Hoefling's vessel for lacking a sanitary device and a working anchor light. He had a deal to use the facilities at the nearby marina but quickly went out and reportedly bought what he needed to comply. Three months later while he was on a business trip, the City of Miami seized and destroyed his boat and all his belongings. As a result, he was homeless. He sued under § 1983, maritime law, and state law. He stated a claim under the Fourth Amendment for seizure and destruction without notice or cause and a “taking.”    At the ...
5 comments
Read more