Obstructive Bridges and the Pennsylvania and Oregon Rules

Tuesday, July 16, 2002
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that a finding by the U.S. Coast Guard that a bridge over a navigable waterway constitutes an unreasonable obstruction to navigation does not invoke the Pennsylvania Rule and does not, on its own, rebut the Oregon Rule. In the instant case, defendant's towboat and barges allided with plaintiff's bridge. Some months previously, the Coast Guard had issued an Order to Alter the bridge, based on a finding that the bridge constituted an unreasonable obstruction to navigation as defined by the Truman-Hobbs Act. The bridge had not been altered prior to the allision. The Oregon Rule provides that, when a vessel allides with a fixed structure, there is a presumption that the vessel was at fault. The Pennsylvania Rule provides that, when a marine casualty involves violation of a safety regulation, there is a presumption that the violation caused the casualty. The court held that an Order to Alter is not a safety regulation. It further held that an Order to Alter does not, on its own, overcome the presumption of the Oregon Rule, but may be considered by the trier of fact in determining whether, based on all the evidence, the presumption has been overcome. There are 48 more states and several territories not yet cited, so debate may continue. Source: HK Law

Maritime Today


The Maritime Industry's original and most viewed E-News Service

Maritime Reporter June 2016 Digital Edition
FREE Maritime Reporter Subscription
Latest Maritime News    rss feeds

Legal

ECDIS Related Detentions on the Rise

ClassNK has been informed by Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) that during PSC inspections it has been increasingly reported that vessels have been detained

CMA CGM Crosses 90% Ownership Threshold in NOL

Container shipper CMA CGM S.A. has crossed the 90 percent ownership threshold in Neptune Orient Lines Limited (NOL), enabling it to bring the Singapore company private.

UAE Top Court: Physical Bunkers Suppliers Have No Right to Recourse against Owners/Charterers

The OW saga - UAE Federal Supreme Court decides that physical suppliers of bunkers have no right to recourse against Owners/Charterers. In the first decision

 
 
Maritime Contracts Maritime Security Maritime Standards Offshore Oil Salvage Ship Electronics Ship Repair Ship Simulators Shipbuilding / Vessel Construction Sonar
rss | archive | history | articles | privacy | contributors | top maritime news | about us | copyright | maritime magazines
maritime security news | shipbuilding news | maritime industry | shipping news | maritime reporting | workboats news | ship design | maritime business

Time taken: 0.0640 sec (16 req/sec)