IS YOUR VESSEL SEAWORTHY?
By Allen E. Graham

To ensure the safety of your passengers and crew, charter vessel operators should maintain a seaworthy vessel. Unseaworthiness is a well-established admiralty rule, which allows for seamen (crew) to recover for personal injuries sustained in the service of the vessel. Charter vessel owners should be reminded of the duties regarding their vessel's seaworthy condition and the legal definition of unseaworthiness. It is materially different from the definition most vessel owners perceive. Unseaworthiness, as a legal remedy, is separate and apart from a vessel owner's obligations under the Jones Act and for maintenance and cure.

An owner of a vessel can be liable to a seaman or crewmember for an injury caused by the unseaworthiness of the vessel, or its appliances or equipment. Unseaworthiness is defined as an "absolute duty to provide to every member of his crew a vessel and appurtenances reasonably fit for their intended use." Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, Inc., 362 U.S. 539, 550, 80 S. Ct. 926 at 933 (1960). A vessel may be unseaworthy when the charter boat owner fails to provide adequate equipment for an assigned task. Johnson v. Offshore Express, 845 F.2d 1347, 1355 (5th Cir. 1988). Seaworthiness can even extend to an unforeseeable malfunction of a piece of equipment under proper use. Usner v. Luckenbach Overseas Corp., 400 U.S. 494, 499, 91 S. Ct. 514, 517 (1971). It is evident the doctrine of seaworthiness is broad and liberally defined, being a relative term weighing heavily on the type of vessel and the nature of the voyage. Even a temporary condition of unseaworthiness can hold a vessel liable for injuries caused to seamen. This calls for frequent safety inspections of equipment to help minimalize the possibility of injuries and litigation.

The ship owner does not need to have actual or constructive knowledge of the unseaworthy condition to be held liable. Mitchell at 549, 80 S. Ct. At 932. The claim of unseaworthiness is not dependent upon a finding of negligence. Ferrara v. A & V. Fishing, Inc., 99 F.3d 449 (1st Cir. 1996). The reason for this is "that unseaworthiness is a condition, and how that condition came into being - whether by negligence or otherwise is quite irrelevant to the owner's liability for personal injuries resulting from it." Usner, 400 U.S. at 498 (emphasis in original).

Finally, for a claim of un-seaworthiness four things must be established:

1. The doctrine extends to the claimant.

2. The injury was caused by a part of the ship or its appliances.

3. The equipment was not reasonably fit for its intended use.

4. The un-seaworthy condition proximately caused his injuries.
Gebhard v. S.S. Hawaiian Legislator, 425 F.2d 1303, 1310-1312 (9th Cir. 1970).

While passengers may not hold a charter vessel liable upon the doctrine of un-seaworthiness, passengers may use the existence of an unseaworthy condition as evidence of inadequate maintenance/operation of the vessel in a negligence case. Extreme diligence of the vessel owner is called for in the monitoring and maintaining the vessel in "ship shape."

Is your vessel reasonably fit? Good luck and good boating!