Kiel Regional Court emphasizes due diligence obligations in crane operations – responsibility for crane marks
In our region, yachts are typically lifted by crane twice a year. A recent ruling by the Kiel Regional Court highlights the importance of considering the legal aspects of yacht lifting: The court upheld the liability of a yacht service company for a faulty lifting operation, thereby setting important standards for the application of freight law in the maritime service sector. This ruling may have a significant impact on maritime practices in Schleswig-Holstein: Crane operations are not a side job – they require specialized knowledge, attention to detail, and a safety awareness that should not be underestimated, especially in the yachting industry. This development is likely to attract more clients to shipyards known for their meticulousness and reliability.
What had happened?
The defendant company was contracted to lift a large sailing yacht out of the water and winterize it. Crane markings were attached to the yacht, but it remained unclear until the last minute when and by whom they had been placed. One of these markings was positioned almost vertically above the propeller. In the hectic autumn “crane rush hour,” the crane operator relied on these markings without checking them himself. As a result, the service company did not slowly guide the crane sling along the hull to the point of impact, but instead lifted it vertically from below. This caused severe damage to the yacht’s saildrive and propeller shaft. The service company denied all liability, citing the crane markings, and refused to pay damages.
This is how the Kiel Regional Court ruled:
The court followed earlier rulings of several higher regional courts. It classified the underlying contract as a contract of carriage and clarified that the executing company is liable as the carrier. This applies even if crane markings on the vessel might be incorrect or could be interpreted differently (e.g., as markings for the propulsion system). Particularly when the originator of such markings is unclear, the court held that the expertise of the crane operator, who performs such crane operations commercially, outweighs that of an owner who might (believe he) knows his vessel. Private owners typically lack the expertise regarding the necessary load distribution, lifting points, and other intricacies of crane operations.
The chamber of the regional court commented:
“Even if an owner provides information on where he believes the straps should be attached, this does not relieve the defendant of the obligation to exercise the usual and therefore required care at the time of crane operation.”
In the court’s opinion, the damage could have been avoided by simple, established precautionary measures, in particular by careful and slow sling handling. The court rejected exoneration under the relevant technical standard, as the defendant had not exercised the required “utmost care.” The court also denied any contributory negligence on the part of the boat owner, since the responsibility for safe crane handling typically lies with the service provider.
In the words of the Chamber:
“As a specialist company, the defendant is far better positioned to assess the particular risks of a crane operation and the associated need to take further safety measures than the boat owner.”
Importance for practice
The decision underscores the clear allocation of liability in this specialized legal area and emphasizes the high standards required of professional boatbuilding companies during lifting and transport operations. Not only boat owners, but also particularly professional and trustworthy shipyards and winter storage facilities, to whom one would readily entrust one’s yacht, are likely to benefit.
YACHT-RECHT.de is familiar with the relevant case law and is happy to advise on both clear contract drafting and in the event of damage.