This case concerned whether the plaintiff, A/S Em Z Svitzer, was entitled to a salvage reward for assistance provided to the defendant, Andelsfærgeselskabet Læsø amba, when the ferry Margrete Læsø ran aground off Læsø on 27 December 1998. The plaintiff sought DKK 3,500,000, whereas the defendant offered the plaintiff DKK 100,000.

On Sunday, 27 December 1998, at 15h00, the ferry Margrete Læsø departed from Vesterø Harbor towards Frederikshavn. There were 166 passengers, 10 crew members, 41 cars and two trucks on board. There was a southwesterly wind with gusts from 18-30 m/s. The water level was 35 cm above daily waters. Shortly after the Margrete Læsø's departure, the ferry veered to starboard, and hit the pier. It was impossible to steer the ferry, which grounded at approximately 15h10 on a course of 162 degrees with its port side towards Rønne Rev. The ferry did not have a list. The plaintiff was summoned by the defendant to assist in getting the ferry free. The plaintiff sent two tugs, the Svava and the St Knud, with salvage equipment from Frederikshavn. The tugs arrived at the ferry around 18h30. After several unsuccessful attempts to release the ferry, it was released around 22h00, after which it was towed to Frederikshavn by the Svava. The Margrete Læsø's value, including cargo, amounted to DKK 100 million.

The plaintiff argued that it perceived the defendant's request as a request for salvage assistance. It was irrelevant that the parties did not enter into a salvage agreement at that time. The ferry was in danger during the grounding, so the assistance provided by the defendant was 'salvage' according to the Merchant Shipping Act, s 441(a), which corresponds to art 1.a of the Salvage Convention 1989. The ferry had run aground, which in itself constituted a risk. The ferry would also have been set up even higher on the ground at later high tides, regardless of whether it was possible to pump in additional ballast water. The ferry would have suffered significant damage as a result, and there was a risk of total loss if the plaintiff had not completed the salvage. The plaintiff's assistance is undoubtedly covered by the Merchant Shipping Act's definition of salvage, and as a result the plaintiff is entitled to a salvage reward.

In determining the salvage reward, it must be emphasised that: the salved value is DKK 100 million; the plaintiff is a professional salvor with a significant, easily accessible, and efficient emergency preparedness, and equipment for salvage; the plaintiff's efforts were quick, efficient, and professional; the weather was extremely bad; the grounding site was exposed; the salvage was difficult; and the salvage was successful without the ferry suffering further damage. The plaintiff took a significant risk in the salvage operation. Finally, the defendant avoided evacuating the passengers.

The plaintiff argued that the salvage award must thus be set at 3.5% of the salved value, which corresponds to the plaintiff's claim that the defendant must pay DKK 3,500,000 for the salvage.

The defendant contended that an agreement was reached between the parties on 27 December 1998 that the plaintiff's assistance was exclusively towage assistance. Therefore, no salvage agreement had been entered into between the parties. On 28 December 1998, a clear and binding agreement was entered into on board the Margrete Læsø that the plaintiff's fee for the ordered towage assistance should be DKK 40,000 for the call fee and DKK 5,000 per hour, which amounted to a total of DKK 100,000. The defendant rightly assumed that Louis Sørensen, as the plaintiff's head of department, had a power of attorney to enter into such an agreement. It was quite common for Louis Sørensen to issue invoices for towage assistance. Since it was towage assistance that the defendant had ordered, it was only natural that Louis Sørensen, on behalf of the plaintiff, issued an invoice for this. The plaintiff made no reservation when the price was mentioned. The defendant accepted the plaintiff's offer after consulting its insurance company.

Thus, the defendant argued, no salvage agreement had been entered into. The plaintiff was under no circumstances entitled to a salvage reward in accordance with the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, as the Margrete Læsø was not in danger. In this connection, decisive emphasis must be placed on the fact that the ferry, after the grounding, was completely fixed on a clear sandy bottom without stones in the vicinity. There was no risk that the ferry would tear itself free from the ground. In the event that the water level rose, the ferry had the opportunity to take in additional ballast water. As the ferry did not have a list, and as it was not significantly damaged, it was thus in no way in danger. The plaintiff dramatised the situation quite considerably.

Should the Court reach the conclusion that the conditions for obtaining the right to a salvage reward are met, the plaintiff only solved a simple and uncomplicated task of pulling the ferry free, with a total time consumption of 12 hours, including towing to Frederikshavn. The plaintiff's work was performed with minimal risk. The nature of the danger and the degree of danger suggest that any salvage reward must be determined significantly below what the plaintiff claims, which amount seems completely unreasonable in relation to the plaintiff's efforts.

Held: Although there was no salvage contract, the plaintiff is entitled to salvage compensation of DKK 1,000,000 plus legal costs.

After the Margrete Læsø's grounding, the defendant requested assistance from the plaintiff. In this connection, neither a salvage agreement nor an agreement that the payment was to be made on an hourly basis was reached. It has not been established that the defendant ordered towage assistance on an hourly rate.

It has also not been established that the parties to the conversation between Louis Sørensen, Niels Bondesen and Lai Mortensen immediately after the plaintiff's assistance entered into a binding agreement on payment for the plaintiff's assistance. Louis Sørensen did not have a power of attorney to deviate by agreement from the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act on payment for salvage, which was apparent to the defendant.

The question whether the plaintiff can claim salvage pay then depends on whether the conditions in s 441(a) of the Merchant Shipping Act were present. The Margrete Læsø had run aground. There was a high tide and strong winds. In addition, the Margrete Læsø had suffered machine damage, and thus was not fully seaworthy. In these circumstances, Margrete Læsø was in danger within the meaning of the Merchant Shipping Act, and the plaintiff's assistance must therefore be characterised as salvage in accordance with s 441(a) of the Merchant Shipping Act.

The plaintiff is entitled to a salvage reward determined in accordance with s 446 of the Danish Merchant Shipping Act, which corresponds to art 13 of the Salvage Convention 1989.