Share This Article
The duty to provide assistance at the scene of an accident is governed by a variety of laws. One such law is called “general maritime law,” which applies when someone has been injured near a boat, like on a dock or pier. The article will explore who can be held liable for injuries caused by accidents that happen in this area and what rights victims have against those responsible for their injury.
The duty to provide assistance at the scene of an accident is governed by a variety of laws. One such law is called “general maritime law,” which applies when someone has been injured near a boat, like on a dock or pier.
There are four essential elements that must be considered in order to determine who can be held liable for injuries caused by accidents that happen in this area: (i) whether there was any negligence involved; (ii) where the injury occurred; and if so, (ii) what kind of vessel was involved and (iv), how much care should one expect from the person responsible?
– If no negligent party can be found, then all those affected may have recourse against society as a whole. This is called “contribution,” which means that the person who was injured will not be able to sue for damages, but their share of any award or settlement will come from a common pool and people responsible may need to contribute more than others.
If negligence can be proven by one party (boat operator) then they shall typically be held liable for all injury caused in an accident at this location. In such cases, contribution is unlikely as there were no other negligent parties involved in the incident.
When someone has been harmed near a boat, it’s important to consider factors like where the injury occurred and what kind of vessel was involved before making assumptions about who might have contributed to his/her injuries.
If the boat was rented, for example, there’s a chance that its operator wasn’t negligent in any way. It could be more complicated if it were someone else’s boat or another person who caused the accident. In these cases of uncertainty, it may not even make sense to try and assign blame until all facts are revealed.
(The above content is an excerpt from this blog post)
A common question arising when someone has been hurt near a boat is “who should pay their medical bills?” Unfortunately, there’s no universal answer to this question because every situation varies depending on many factors like location (in or out of water), vessel size/type (boats vary by type from kayaks to yachts), injuries, who’s at fault, and whether the boat’s operator was negligent or not.
The general rule is that if someone wants to claim they were injured while on a boat, it may be possible for them to ask the vessel owner for compensation under maritime law. Whatever else you might have heard about maritime law in this context can’t replace consulting with an attorney first (e.g., “boat operators are always liable” vs “it doesn’t happen often”) because there really are too many variables involved to provide accurate answers without being familiar with all of their circumstances.
There are some exceptions as well: like when someone gets hurt from slipping near dockside or getting hit by cargo on deck; these cases fall into something called ‘landowner liability.’
In these cases, anyone injured on a boat is usually permitted to sue the landowner of any dockside property where they were hurt for negligence. This lawsuit can be filed in state or federal court and if successful, it will entitle them to compensation from the dock owner who was negligent–even when boats are not involved at all. In this situation, there may also be an additional requirement for that person’s injury to have been foreseeable by the dock owner (e.g., someone could get hit with cargo thrown overboard). If no one saw potential danger coming from their knocking about near a ramp leading up onto ships or during loading/unloading operations, then they would still probably find themselves without recourse against those responsible.
The dock owner can be found liable for the injury of anyone on their property, if they were negligent. The standard is negligence and not intentional harm–a person would have to prove that the boat operator was aware of a potential danger (e.g., someone could get hit with cargo thrown overboard) or should have been aware (e.g., when ramps leading up onto ships are being used). Showing this would entitle them to compensation from the dock owner who was negligent–even when boats are not involved at all. There may also be an additional requirement for that person’s injury to have been foreseeable by the dock owner before it occurred. If no one saw potential danger coming from their knocking about near a ramp leading up onto ships, the dock owner’s negligence may not have been foreseeable.
The standard is negligence and not intentional harm–a person would have to prove that the boat operator was aware of a potential danger (e.g., someone could get hit with cargo thrown overboard) or should have been aware (e.g., when ramps leading up onto ships are being used). Showing this would entitle them to compensation from the dock owner who was negligent–even when boats are not involved at all. There may also be an additional requirement for that person’s injury to have been foreseeable by the dock owner before it occurred. If no one saw potential danger, then there’s a good chance the injured person will have to prove that they reasonably feared for their safety.
For example, if someone who is deaf went up onto a ship and was hit by cargo being tossed overboard, the dock owner would be liable because he should have taken reasonable steps (e.g., putting up signs) to alert people of potential danger due to his knowledge about the ramp leading up onto ships in general. The same could apply if an injury happened when no one saw anything before it occurred–if something like this has happened at least once before, you can argue that anyone with sight ought to know better than go near ramps or rails on a boat without first checking things out for themselves.
In that case, the dock owner would be liable because he should have taken reasonable steps (e.g., putting up signs) to alert people of potential danger due to his knowledge about the ramp leading up onto ships in general.
The same could apply if an injury happened when no one saw anything before it occurred–if something like this has happened at least once before, you can argue that anyone with sight ought to know better than go near ramps or rails on a boat without first checking things out for themselves.
In other words: the injured person will have to prove that they reasonably feared for their safety in order for someone else’s negligence to be considered relevant and so require them as well as all others who are present around the area where there is a danger to take reasonable steps to avoid injury If you would like more information about any of these things, please contact us. You can reach out in person or by phone at 305-55-55 ext. 123 and we’ll be happy to answer your questions! Injuries happen all the time– that’s just part of life. But when it comes down to who is responsible for someone hurt near a boat, this has become an age old question asking whether there are any exceptions if injuries happened while no one saw anything before they occurred. When somebody gets injured on board their own ship, it may not seem fair that whomever was operating said vessel didn’t do enough beforehand– but what about those people who don
