The Role of Liability Waivers in the Aftermath of the Titan Sub Tragedy

82

Following the tragic incident involving the implosion of the submersible near the Titanic wreck, the question arises: What significance will liability waivers hold in the aftermath of this event?

It is highly likely that the passengers who lost their lives were required to sign liability waivers before boarding the ill-fated submersible. One such waiver, examined by The Big Big News, was signed by an individual participating in an OceanGate expedition. This waiver explicitly acknowledged the risks associated with the voyage on the Titan vessel and its support vessels. It stated that passengers could potentially suffer physical injury, disability, emotional trauma, or even death while on board the Titan.

Additionally, passengers waived their right to take legal action for personal injury, property damage, or any other losses incurred during the trip. The waiver further emphasized that the vessel was experimental in nature and constructed using materials not extensively utilized in manned submersibles.

As the families of the deceased contemplate their legal options, the liability waiver may play a significant role. Legal experts have indicated that the outcome of the investigation into the disaster will determine many aspects of the case, including the cause of the vessel’s implosion.

WHAT IS A LIABILITY WAIVER?

Liability waivers, also known as release forms, are commonly employed prior to engaging in recreational activities that involve inherent risks, such as skydiving or scuba diving. By signing these documents, participants generally accept the risks and dangers associated with the activity and absolve the company or owner of any liability in the event of injury.

Matthew Shaffer, a trial lawyer specializing in maritime personal injury law, stated that these forms are standard practice before undertaking any “ultra-hazardous recreational activity.” He emphasized that a well-drafted release form covers all potential harm in clear and simple language. Participants are made aware that they are assuming the risks involved and waive any right to seek legal recourse for adverse outcomes resulting from their engagement in the activity.

HOW SIGNIFICANT ARE THESE FORMS IN COURT?

The enforceability of these documents varies depending on the state where they are signed, as different states hold different views on their validity. Signed waivers have been upheld in cases involving scuba divers in Florida and skiers in Colorado.

However, regardless of the waiver’s existence, a court evaluates it in conjunction with other factors. These factors include whether the individual signing the waiver comprehended the form and the risks involved, as well as the nature and degree of danger associated with the activity. The court also considers whether the owner or operator withheld critical information or knowingly exposed the participant to probable harm. Another aspect is whether gross negligence was involved.

Despite the existence of a waiver, legal experts anticipate that the families of the deceased individuals aboard the submersible will pursue legal action not only against OceanGate, the operator of the Titan, but also against the manufacturer of the vessel and companies supplying its components.

“The waiver will undoubtedly be a significant factor in the aftermath of this tragedy, and its impact will depend on the court’s judgment and the facts that emerge,” Shaffer commented.

WILL TITAN WAIVERS BE UPHELD IN COURT?

The complication surrounding the Titan case is that the disaster occurred in international waters. According to the waiver reviewed by The Associated Press, any disputes would be subject to the laws of the Bahamas, where the company OceanGate Expeditions, Ltd. is registered.

Kenneth Abraham, a law professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, acknowledged the terms of the waiver and suggested that if Bahamian law does not favor the families, they might choose to file a lawsuit in the United States or their respective home countries. In such a scenario, the invalidation of the waiver in the U.S. could become part of the legal argument, he added.

However, Steve Flynn, a retired Coast Guard officer and director of Northeastern University’s Global Resilience Institute, expressed skepticism regarding the success of potential lawsuits due to the challenges of establishing jurisdiction. Flynn noted that the implosion occurred in a regulatory gray area, where oversight was essentially absent.

Moreover, determining who to hold accountable and potentially sue could be problematic if OceanGate does survive. Among the deceased passengers was Stockton Rush, the CEO of the company who led the ill-fated expedition. Richard Daynard, a distinguished professor at Northeastern University School of Law, stated that unless the company misrepresented the vessel’s safety, OceanGate is unlikely to be held liable in court. He regarded the case as a clear example of assumption of risk on the part of the explorers.

Furthermore, Daynard pointed out that even if OceanGate were found liable, the company might lack the financial means to pay substantial damages. Given this circumstance, he speculated that the company would be unlikely to possess the required funds if a jury were to award significant compensation.

---

This report includes contributions from Holly Ramer in New Hampshire and Patrick Whittle in Portland, Maine, as writers for Big Big News.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about liability waivers, legal proceedings

More about liability waivers, legal proceedings

• Liability Waivers: What You Need to Know
• Understanding Liability Waivers in Recreational Activities
• The Role of Jurisdiction in International Water Disputes
• Exploring the Limits of Liability in Maritime Law
• Understanding Gross Negligence in Legal Proceedings