Lawsuit

[CineGraphic]

I believe that the passenger contract with Princess waives one's rights to join class action suits, and states that you must use an arbitrator. I thought that would be pretty standard among the other brands. This may get dismissed sooner than you think.

[bouhunter]

21 minutes ago, CineGraphic said:

I believe that the passenger contract with Princess waives one's rights to join class action suits, and states that you must use an arbitrator. I thought that would be pretty standard among the other brands. This may get dismissed sooner than you think.

Those kind of waivers are meaningless if there is true negligence on the part of the party being sued.

[Aquahound]

3 hours ago, ShipWalker said:

 

Why?  Do you know something about this case the rest of us don't?

 

If the "rest of us" has selective amnesia and has forgotten that 4 people died on that cruise and numerous others were infected with COVID; then yes, I guess I do know.  But to be clear, don't read too much in to my one sentence post.  I never said I support those who are suing.  I'm just saying the lawsuit comes as no surprise.  

[ontheweb]

34 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

If the "rest of us" has selective amnesia and has forgotten that 4 people died on that cruise and numerous others were infected with COVID; then yes, I guess I do know.  But to be clear, don't read too much in to my one sentence post.  I never said I support those who are suing.  I'm just saying the lawsuit comes as no surprise.  

Right, there was speculation on the cruisecritic boards about when the lawsuits would begin quite awhile ago.

[iancal]

I hardly think that one should assume that just because there is a clause in a contract that the clause will stand up to examination in a court of law.

 

 In my business life I have seen clauses in numerous commercial contracts which we were advised not to worry about because they would never stand up to a court challenge.

 

Edited June 26, 2020 by iancal

[AlanF65]

17 minutes ago, iancal said:

I hardly think that one should assume that just because there is a clause in a contract that the clause will stand up to examination in a court of law.

 

 In my business life I have seen clauses in numerous commercial contracts which we were advised not to worry about because they would never stand up to a court challenge.

 

Probably the first issue is jurisdiction, the ship did not sail from the US nor was the voyage to end in the US.

[Aquahound]

29 minutes ago, AlanF65 said:

Probably the first issue is jurisdiction, the ship did not sail from the US nor was the voyage to end in the US.

 

Venue is Seattle.  

[DFD1]

Unfortunately, lawsuits are a natural result of situations like this. They serve to find the truth in some instances. In others, they seek monetary settlements just because those settlements might seem likely if the suit is filed.

 

I would expect lots of lawsuits regarding this situation in the days to come. IMO

[AlanF65]

2 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

Venue is Seattle.  

Yes,

But I think the cruise line will argue if can they move forward for something that happened in a foreign country with a foreign based company.

A-

[thinfool]

18 minutes ago, fyree39 said:

This will be interesting. I do think the passengers will win depending on how the complaint is written, particularly with the 40 deaths. It all depends on the jury.

40 deaths?

[thinfool]

8 hours ago, bouhunter said:

Those kind of waivers are meaningless if there is true negligence on the part of the party being sued.

This is true, but according to the HAL contract there will be no 'class action' going on.  All claims are by individual.  Proving negligence may be a heavy lift for an individual and his attorney(s).

Still, the sharks are in the water...circling.

Edited June 26, 2020 by thinfool

[Copper10-8]

Easier than suing the governments of Argentina and Chile..............😎

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Copper10-8

[cruiserchuck]

A person cannot sue a Government without the Government's permission.  As such, I doubt there will be any lawsuits against any Government.  If there are any, they will not be successful.  

 

With respect to lawsuits against HAL, the Cruise Contract states that for "all claims or disputes involving Emotional Harm, bodily injury, illness to or death of any Guest whatsoever . . .  shall be litigated in and before the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle, or as to those lawsuits over which the Federal Courts of the United States lack subject matter jurisdiction, before a court located in King County, State of Washington,  U.S.A."

 

Pursuant to the Cruise Contract, arbitration is required for all claims other than for Emotional Harm, bodily injury, illness to or death of a Guest.  As such, arbitration is not required here. 

 

The Cruise Contract does preclude class actions.  I assume that the lawsuit lists specific individuals as plaintiffs, and thus is not a class action.

 

 

[Tampa Girl]

On 6/26/2020 at 8:33 AM, bouhunter said:

When we boarded Nieuw Statendam March 8 we knew other ships had experienced covid issues.  We rolled the dice and had an amazing cruise, knowing that there was some risk.  Not just of catching the virus but of being locked up on a quarantined ship.  Yes the cruise lines knew more problems were coming, but everyone boarding in March either knew that too or was completely ignorant of what was happening in the world.  I'm sorry but anyone in a high risk category who boarded a ship in March needed to have their head examined.  And we all know there were a lot of elderly people on Zaandam.

 

My thoughts exactly.  There was an article cited here recently, telling the sad story of a couple who boarded the March 8th Zaandam cruise, knowing full well that Covid was a possibility.  They chose to sail anyway, for strictly financial concerns.  They both became infected and his wife died.  A tragic ending to what, in hindsight but yet foreseeable, decision.

[Tampa Girl]

14 hours ago, thinfool said:

40 deaths?

 

I believe that there were four deaths at the time that the Zaandam disembarked in FLL, one of which was not Covid related.  One of the crew died subsequent to the disembarkation.  I don't remember if there were other Zaandam deaths, but I don't think the number rose to 40. 

[npcl]

On 6/26/2020 at 1:03 PM, AlanF65 said:

Yes,

But I think the cruise line will argue if can they move forward for something that happened in a foreign country with a foreign based company.

A-

Hard for them to argue that when the cruise line itself declared the venue for any law suits as part of its cruise contract.

[resistk]

Cruise lines have been able to beat lawsuits for decades through their adhesion contracts and offshoring but I think their luck is running out.  The really big guns are out at the major class action law firms and they have deep pockets.  If there is insurance involved, they will have a say in the matter too and they do not want their exposure to go too high.  Bottom line is there may be a settlement or settlements and cruise lines may have trouble obtaining liability insurance in the future. Wouldn't be surprised if they try a few bankruptcy filings if the lawsuits gain momentum.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, resistk said:

If there is insurance involved, they will have a say in the matter too and they do not want their exposure to go too high.  Bottom line is there may be a settlement or settlements and cruise lines may have trouble obtaining liability insurance in the future.

In the maritime world, this kind of claim is covered by the cruise line's "Protection & Indemnity", or P&I insurance.  The vast majority of P&I insurance is done by "P&I "Clubs"" which are mutual insurance groups, owned primarily by the shipowners in the "club", and the members pay into a "risk pool" that covers claims, so the cruise lines are essentially self-insured, since a heavy rise in claims (such as covid suits) will simply require the members to pay more into the pool.

[resistk]

5 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

In the maritime world, this kind of claim is covered by the cruise line's "Protection & Indemnity", or P&I insurance.  The vast majority of P&I insurance is done by "P&I "Clubs"" which are mutual insurance groups, owned primarily by the shipowners in the "club", and the members pay into a "risk pool" that covers claims, so the cruise lines are essentially self-insured, since a heavy rise in claims (such as covid suits) will simply require the members to pay more into the pool.

 

Trident Insurance Company Ltd. is Carnival's captive insurer:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/815097/000081509719000004/exhibit21201810-k.htm

 

[chengkp75]

8 minutes ago, resistk said:

 

Trident Insurance Company Ltd. is Carnival's captive insurer:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/815097/000081509719000004/exhibit21201810-k.htm

 

That company issues "marine insurance" like hull insurance.  From Carnival Corp's Form 10-K, they belong to the following P&I Clubs:  Gard, Steamship Mutual, and UK Club.

[Nymich]

The House of Representatives Majority is investigating all the CCL ships that were shoved out in early March.  They have CCL answering for the period in question.  Pretty sure we will see hearings.

[cscurlock]

On 6/26/2020 at 12:45 AM, iancal said:

I believe that the discovery procedure in this law suit, and in other lawsuits, may bring out the facts about what each cruise line knew, including HAL, and what the executive decision making criteria was..  Seems to me to be an important issue about which we know nothing at the moment.  Not to mention first hand accounts of people who were actually on the ship (s)

 

I don't understand how anyone could comment on the merits, or absence thereof, when he or she has zero knowledge or real insight into both the salient facts and the relevant case law.  You might feel very differently if you were on was of these ships that are, and will be the target of these litigations.  I do not think that this is straightforward for either party.

Merits are largely irrelevant and so are cruise contracts in death cases.  Its up to the judge to decide if they go forward.  If they have a good case then it will move forward.  If what that article says is true and the company told the passengers that they had all these safety measures in place and did none of those, then that is gross negligence.  I have a feeling they will settle quite fast in order to avoid that discovery phase.   Because they will subpoena all kinds of stuff the cruise line does not want out in public.  Then you have the passengers going on TV telling the public why cruising is very dangerous and what they went through.  How their family member died alone.  Also stating the US should make it easier to have lawsuits against cruise lines so other people don't have to go through what they went through.  You know the kind of press that they really really don't need right now.

[doctork]

My canceled cruise was a full charter on Veendam and was scheduled to sail on March 18.  The first case of Covid-19 was diagnosed January 20 and that patient was treated at the hospital where I send my patients.  The first US death from Covid-19 occurred on February 29 and it was becoming obvious that the illness was spreading in the community, not just among those who had traveled to China.

 

Corporate Carnival, HAL, and the organizers of our cruise were all saying that completing a health questionnaire prior to boarding, increasing the cleaning on board, and denying boarding for those who had traveled to China would ensure that the cruise was safe.  The cruise would go on!  Either sail or lose money.

 

By that first week in March I am quite sure it was apparent to all The Powers That Be that cruising was not safe and widespread Covid outbreaks on cruise ships were inevitable.  I don't know about the legal details, but from a medical and ethical point of view, the cruise lines would seem to have some liability.  They knew or should have known of the risk, so this lawsuit seems to have merit.

Edited June 28, 2020 by doctork

[ontheweb]

7 hours ago, doctork said:

My canceled cruise was a full charter on Veendam and was scheduled to sail on March 18.  The first case of Covid-19 was diagnosed January 20 and that patient was treated at the hospital where I send my patients.  The first US death from Covid-19 occurred on February 29 and it was becoming obvious that the illness was spreading in the community, not just among those who had traveled to China.

 

Corporate Carnival, HAL, and the organizers of our cruise were all saying that completing a health questionnaire prior to boarding, increasing the cleaning on board, and denying boarding for those who had traveled to China would ensure that the cruise was safe.  The cruise would go on!  Either sail or lose money.

 

By that first week in March I am quite sure it was apparent to all The Powers That Be that cruising was not safe and widespread Covid outbreaks on cruise ships were inevitable.  I don't know about the legal details, but from a medical and ethical point of view, the cruise lines would seem to have some liability.  They knew or should have known of the risk, so this lawsuit seems to have merit.

Were there other ships that sailed without any cases during that time period?

 

If it was so evident, why did the passengers not know? Or did they willingly take on the risk if they did know?

 

Those are also questions that could very well be asked.  Hindsight tells us those ships should not have sailed, but obviously no one had all the information we now have. Even now we are told scientists are still learning more about this virus.

[npcl]

8 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Were there other ships that sailed without any cases during that time period?

 

If it was so evident, why did the passengers not know? Or did they willingly take on the risk if they did know?

 

Those are also questions that could very well be asked.  Hindsight tells us those ships should not have sailed, but obviously no one had all the information we now have. Even now we are told scientists are still learning more about this virus.

The cruise lines, even today are not exactly open with the number of COVID-19 cases.  They have routinely hidden behind "flu like symptoms" and have tested for COVID only when forced.  If it wasn't for the land based authorities is Japan, Australia and the US getting involved we would not have known the extent of the illness of those three ships.

 

You have crew on the ships, that are still testing positive when they arrive in their home country, and where they are not being tested by their cruise line, unless forced as part of the repatriation process.

 

The discovery process on what was known and what instructions were given to the ships in the early days of the outbreak will be quite interesting.