Skåne Entreprenad Service AB (SES) entered into a contract with a customer for the transport of beets from one Danish port to another. To fulfil the contract, SES chartered a tugboat from Saga Shipping & Trading Corp Ltd (Saga Shipping) and a barge from AB Nestor. During the transport, both Danish ports were damaged by the tugboat and the barge chartered by SES.

For the Supreme Court, the questions were whether:

1. Saga Shipping was liable as a shipowner for the damage caused by the tugboat;

2. the port had a maritime lien over the tugboat for its potential claim for damages caused by the tugboat; and

3. arrest of the tugboat could be allowed.

Held: The Supreme Court initially found that SES was liable as a shipowner due to the bareboat charter arrangement even though Saga Shipping was the registered owner of the tugboat.

The Court then found that the claim for damages was a maritime claim within the scope of the Danish Merchant Shipping Act, s 91(1)(1), corresponding with the International Convention Relating to the Arrest of Sea-Going Ships (Arrest Convention 1952), art.1.1.a, according to which maritime claims include damage caused by any vessel either in collision or otherwise.

Consequently, arrest was allowed pursuant to the Danish Merchant Shipping Act, s 92, corresponding with the Arrest Convention 1952, art 2, according to which a vessel may be arrested in respect of any maritime claim.

Finally, the Court found that the claim for damages was secured by a maritime lien pursuant to the Danish Merchant Shipping Act, s 51(1)(4), corresponding with the MLM Convention 1967, art 4.1.4, according to which claims against the owner based in tort in respect of damage to property occurring in direct connection with the operation of the vessel are secured by a maritime lien on the vessel. Because of this, arrest was allowed even though the owner of the tugboat, Saga Shipping, was not liable for the claim of damages due to the bareboat charter arrangement.