The case arose from a collision in August 2015 between the capesize bulk carrier, Mount Apo, and the liquefied natural gas (LNG) carrier, Hanjin Ras Laffan. The collision occurred within the westbound lane of the Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) in the Singapore Strait. Hanjin Ras Laffan was transiting the Singapore Strait from east to west. Mt Apo had just left the port of Singapore and was attempting to cross the westbound lane of the TSS in order to reach the eastbound lane to continue its journey eastwards.

As neither side contended that the other was solely to blame for the collision, the central issue to be determined in the present case was the apportionment of liability. In this regard, s 1 of the Maritime Conventions Act 1911 provides:

(1)  Where, by the fault of two or more ships, damage or loss is caused to one or more of those ships, to their cargoes or freight, or to any property on board, the liability to make good the damage or loss shall be in proportion to the degree in which each ship was in fault, except that if, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, it is not possible to establish different degrees of fault, the liability shall be apportioned equally.
(2) Nothing in this section shall operate so as to render any ship liable for any loss or damage to which her fault has not contributed.

Thus the apportionment of liability depends on fault, and s 1(2) of the Maritime Conventions Act makes clear that only causative fault is relevant. Useful guidance on the approach to apportionment of liability is to be found in The Nordlake and The Sea Eagle [2016] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 656 which was cited with approval in The Dream Star [2018] 4 SLR 473 (CMI61).

Held: Taking the totality of the circumstances into account, the Mount Apo must bear the majority of the fault for the collision. An appropriate and fair way to apportion liability in this case would be 60:40 in favour of Hanjin Ras Laffan.