These proceedings arise out of an accident which took place at sea on 15 November 2011. The plaintiff, Mr Robert Kieran, was a pilot in the port of Dublin, and claims that, as he was disembarking a pilot boat belonging to the first defendant and embarking on the second defendant’s vessel, the Johanna Desiree, the vessels were navigated in a negligent manner, and as a result, the pilot ladder became fouled causing him to lose his grip. The pilot boat did not collide with the Johanna Desiree.

It was ordered that the question of whether the plaintiff’s claim was a maritime claim within the meaning of s 46(2) of the Irish Civil Liability Act would be tried as a preliminary issue.

The first defendant submitted that s 46(2) required two conditions: (1) the damage or injury must relate to a collision between two or more vessels and (2) any injury, if suffered, is by a person on board either vessel.

The plaintiff submitted that it was not necessary for a collision to have taken place for s 46(2) to apply.

Counsel for the plaintiff argued that both the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law relating to Collision between Vessels 1910 (Collision Convention 1910) (art 14) and the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to Civil Jurisdiction in Matters of Collision (Collision (Civil Jurisdiction) Convention 1952) (art 4) gave the definition of ‘collision’ an extended meaning.

It was common ground that only the Collision Convention 1910, and not the Collision (Civil Jurisdiction) Convention 1952, was part of Irish law when the Irish Civil Liability Act 1961 was enacted. 

Held: Article 14 of the Collision Convention 1910 does no more than offer the Contracting Parties to the Convention a limited period in which to extend the scope of the Convention.

Article 4 of the Collision (Civil Jurisdiction) Convention 1952 specifies that the convention shall also apply when damage is caused by one ship to persons on board the other through non-compliance with the regulations, even where there has been no actual collision.

Ultimately the court held that the plaintiff’s claim did fall within s 46(2) Irish Civil Liability Act for the following two reasons:

1. On a literal reading of s 46 and having regard to the absence of the word ‘collision’ therein, the section can and should be interpreted as applying to damage/personal injury to a person on board in circumstances where there is some interaction between two or more vessels involving fault on the part of one or more vessels (without a collision); and
2. Having regard to the fact that the Collision (Civil Jurisdiction) Convention 1952 has now been adopted into Irish law, and that art 4 applies the Convention even when there has been no actual collision, an anomaly would be created if the court concluded that a collision was a necessary ingredient to bring a claim within s 46, which would put the legislation at odds with the Convention.

For these reasons there is no requirement for the purpose of the Irish legislation that there be an actual collision.