Assistance rendered by Multraship, using its tugboat Multratug 5, to the yacht No Woman No Cry, property of Rijkeboer, which was stranded on a groyne in the river Scheldt on 17 August 2010. The yacht was not refloated that day. At high tide that day the yacht took in water. The two people on board the yacht were brought ashore by the Multratug 5. On the next day, 18 August, Multraship wrenched the yacht loose from the groyne, using the floating sheerleg Delta, and towed the yacht to the port of Breskens. Multraship claimed the following from Rijkeboer: principally payment for the costs incurred on a cost-plus basis, and alternatively remuneration for assistance provided (salvage reward) and ‘special compensation’. Rijkeboer et al submitted a counterclaim for damages resulting from the initial unsuccessful salvage attempt.

Held: This was not a contract for services on a cost-plus basis concluded between Multraship and Rijkeboer on 17 August 2010 in order to save the yacht, but rather a salvage operation. An email from Multraship to Rijkeboer, sent on 17 August 2010, merely contained a description of how Multraship would try to wrench the yacht loose. This message could not be seen as a proposal to remove the yacht on a cost-plus basis.

The provisions of the Salvage Convention 1989, as incorporated in Book 8 of the Dutch Civil Code, are self-executing. This is a case of salvage within the meaning of the Convention. It is not in dispute that the yacht was in danger and that Multraship rendered assistance to Rijkeboer by removing and salvaging the yacht from the groyne.

The salvage operation was successful.

The yacht was salvaged with the use of a tugboat and a floating sheerleg, a diving team was present and the whole operation took more than one and a half days. No special dangers or other circumstances appeared to justify a special compensation. A modern, well-maintained, 21-metre long motor yacht was salvaged. All things considered, a salvage award of EUR 30,000 was reasonable.

The salvor carried out the salvage operation with due care. Multraship could assume that Rijkeboer’s yacht was watertight, and Multraship had no reason to believe, nor was this communicated to it, that Rijkeboer had not closed/locked the cable transductions in a watertight manner, which caused the yacht to take in water.