Austrian and international law after collision, please help!

[knockabout]

strong wind squall/act of god/was the accident reported to marine and safety/if not civil matter between to parties/high risk without police report

[jmschmidt]

A bunch of wrong and irrelevant information here. I have read these posts three times and have yet to see stated in what jurisdiction this incident occurred. The country mentioned is Austria. While Austria has many wonderful lakes (and people), I’m quite sure this did not happening Austria.
The jurisdiction under which this case would be adjudicated would be the place that it occurred in or under international law if outside the territorial waters of any country.
I suspect that one or all of the parties; the alleged offender, his insurance company or the owner of the damaged boat are all Austrian. This is irrelevant. Assuming that the incident occurred in the territorial waters of some other sovereign country this is where the aggrieved boat owner should bring a law suit or seek redress himself, not in Austria. Forget Austria.
If the alleged offender actually had a legitimate policy covering all aspects of maritime law, including public liability as should have been the case, that insurance company is required to respond to any law suit filed against one of its policy holders anywhere in the world. It’s possible the alleged offender did not have such a policy but carried some sort of rudimentary coverage with severe limitations. These are frequently offered to marina managers and government officials who require insurance in order to use their facilities or enter their waters.
A lawsuit properly filed with legal notice properly given to the individual alleged offender at his physical address, not his insurance company, should be made. Under the provisions of subrogation, if the alleged offender has a legitimate policy of insurance, his insurance company, and/or he personally, is required to respond within the time allotted in the lawsuit or face a default judgment in the favor of the damaged boat owner.
Hiring a lawyer with experience in maritime law in the country where the incident occurred would be the first step. As others have mentioned, with two years having already passed the boat owner should be aware that there may be only a short time left (if any) to avoid the statute of limitations on filing such a law suit.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by lars

I would suggest bringing the suit against the boat owner and have him sweat it out with his insurance co.
Irrelevant if he is insured or not. Go after him and his boat and try to get a judgement.

If he has third party liability and you sue him for damages then his insurer should reimburse him for his costs under his policy that's one of the things third party is about.

It should not matter that you have the same insurer. You pay for your policy, he pays for his - separate contracts. There is a fair chance that if you actually file a case the insurer will settle, particularly if your lawyer has a good reputation for winning.

You are suing him for negligence in not mooring (securing his vessel against adverse weather conditions) his vessel correctly which is pretty self apparent if he dragged a mooring down onto your vessel which did not move.

In addition you can claim that your vessel was moored appropriately and did not drag in the same weather conditions. It would also help if his vessel was the only one in the anchorage which dragged as they all would have experienced the same conditions.

[moseriw]

I am Austrian and of course interrested in the case. BUT I could not find out where it happened? that is important!

Next ok I assume we are talking about your own boat. The catamaran was owned by the Skipper or just on charter?

Tks for info.

[Zoute Sanne]

Hi everyone and thanks for all the reply's.

It all happened in Trinidad, the most south-eastern island of the Caribbean.
There was a squall, but not extreme and in the weather-station at the nearby airport, no strong winds were registered.
I still have one year left till the case expires (has to be done within three years in Austria) and the case needs to be brought to court in Austria. This is because the process needs to take place in the land of the flag of the ship that is accused, as stated in the Brussels Collision Convention.
Indeed I need to sue the owner of the catamaran (which is a private yacht) and not the insurance company, the insurance company though, does all the correspondence and arranges for lawyer etc. since that is where he is insured for.
I understand that the best thing to do would be to hire a good Austrian lawyer that knows something about the sea and boats, unfortunately I can not afford that, so that is why I am on a search by my own and have a pro-deo lawyer (or something similar) who knows nothing about laws at sea.
If there would be an Austrian office that works on a no cure no pay base, I would for sure go in with that, but I did not find one.
A lot of people replied that there is practically no liability at sea, but all three lawyers I spoke to about this case told me they thought I make a pretty good chance to win this.
Even the Dutch representative of the insurance advised me to sew her own company, I would say that means something....

Thanks again and I still hope maybe someone knows some names and numbers of specific laws that may be appropriate here.

All the best,

Sanne

[boatman61]

My feeling is if.. and its a Big If.. you manage to get anywhere with this you'll have to be content with a 50/50 blame and half the damages.
He was not on the boat to prevent the collision.. but neither were you to avoid the collision or.. at the very least minimise the damage.
I have been in a collision at sea and was uninsured at the time.. T-boned by another boat doing 6kts under motor while the 4 crew members were all below deck.
Regardless of the fact I was solo.. near becalmed with no working engine and barely moving against a spring tide.. the fact that I was also down below cooking a meal meant that I.. like them failed to keep a proper watch that 'could' have prevented the incident..
The bit that rankled most was.. they only broke a bow roller whereas I suffered a 19ft hull deck join split and a 4ft vertical split in the hull just fore of the shrouds..
**** happens.l

[moseriw]

You are talking about the P Insurance company in Vienna as contractor for the catamaran?

I live in Vienna and may be able to assist though I am not a lawyer.
Drop me a contact at moser-willi.at

Usually P is one of the best insurances one can have but the problem with insurances is that they usually have to
pay against contract and concludil law.

So find out if the one who rented the mooring for the cat is responsible for the accident or not. (Law of Trinidad and Tobago)
Next: Which law covers the case against the cat in TT?

I think it was in TT waters and therefore TT Law goes first. If there is no regulation then its getting one step higher =
International Law and Rules.

[Zoute Sanne]

Originally Posted by boatman61

My feeling is if.. and its a Big If.. you manage to get anywhere with this you'll have to be content with a 50/50 blame and half the damages.
He was not on the boat to prevent the collision.. but neither were you to avoid the collision or.. at the very least minimise the damage.
I have been in a collision at sea and was uninsured at the time.. T-boned by another boat doing 6kts under motor while the 4 crew members were all below deck.
Regardless of the fact I was solo.. near becalmed with no working engine and barely moving against a spring tide.. the fact that I was also down below cooking a meal meant that I.. like them failed to keep a proper watch that 'could' have prevented the incident..
The bit that rankled most was.. they only broke a bow roller whereas I suffered a 19ft hull deck join split and a 4ft vertical split in the hull just fore of the shrouds..
**** happens.l

Boatman 61,

That would mean that if your boat is moored somewhere, and you are not on board, and another vessel brakes lose and hits your boat at which it damages itself, you would have to pay for the damages of the boat broken lose, even if you have no damage yourself and he hit your boat, that stayed in position. I don's know how you feel about that, but to me that feels very awkward.
Not?

Best regards,
Sanne

[boatman61]

No.. just 50percent.. lifes a bitch

[Malcolm66]

I have had dealings with many insurers in the past and a good number of policies state that if your vessel is on a swing mooring that the mooring should be regularly checked and that the mooring be sufficient for the vessel attached to it. If the insured fails to comply with this and there is a resultant collision insurers may deny liability as the insured failed in his duty to abide by the conditions set by his policy. That being said a lawyers letter to the third party involved and his insurers quite often gets discussions moving. Good Luck

[capngeo]

I am often in wonder how the owners of a mooring you are forced to use can claim no responsibility for their function.