This was an appeal in cassation against the judgment of the Poitiers Court of Appeal, 4 October 1989. On 20 January 1980, the pleasure vessel Mariabel, owned by Mr Y and insured by Via Nord Monde IARD and Groupement Français d'Assurances et l'Europe (the insurers), sank. A liability limitation fund was constituted on 2 December 1986 on the basis of art 58 of the Law of 3 January 1967. Ms X, the widow of one of the victims of the sinking, objected to the constitution of the limitation fund. Her claim was dismissed by the President of the Commercial Court, but upheld by the Court of Appeal, which held that the limitation fund must be constituted according to the provisions of the Law of 21 December 1984, which had taken effect on 1 December 1986, and the application of which entailed the fixing of the fund guarantee at a higher amount.
Mr Y and the insurers criticised the judgment for having ordered them to pay a sum into the liability limitation fund on an application of the Law of 21 December 1984. As the law only provides for the future, it follows that, in the event that a legal provision limits the amount of compensation due for compensation for damage, it is the law in force on the date of the accident which alone must be applied. By deciding to apply the provisions of the Law of 21 December 1984 and of the LLMC 1976, which entered into force on 1 December 1986, to damage which had occurred on 20 January 1980, the Court of Appeal violated art 2 of the Civil Code.
Held: Appeal dismissed.
A liability limitation fund, the constitution procedure of which is commenced by an order of the President of the Tribunal, is governed by the law in force, not on the date when the damage was caused by the maritime event as a result of which it was constituted, or of the filing of the request made by the shipowner, but on the date on which the order constituting the fund is made. The order opening the procedure for setting up the fund had been issued on 2 December 1986, after the entry into force of the Law of 1 December 1984. The Court of Appeal rightly held that this law was applicable to the case.