Families of Titanic submersible victims could sue OceanGate for $100 mn: Decoding legal course of action

Families of the Titanic submersible victims could sue its operator OceanGate, the maker of the tragic Titan vessel and companies that supplied parts to build the sub for the expedition to the wreckage, legal experts have said. According to lawyers, if any third parties proven to have been negligent and responsible for the Titan's collapse, the relatives may file a claim for compensation against them.

According to legal experts, the families of five people, who paid $250,000 apiece to journey 12,500 feet below the surface of the Atlantic, may launch wrongful death and negligence cases. Liability releases are believed to have been requested of the five fatal passengers before they boarded the ship, which sank on June 18 close to the Titanic disaster.

Also read: WATCH: Teenager on tragic Titanic submersible solved Rubik's Cube in 20 seconds; wanted to break work record

As families weigh their legal options, this waiver may be crucial. However, the fact that the catastrophe occurred in foreign seas significantly complicates matters. According to legal experts, the implosion took place "basically in a regulatory no man's land," and it will be difficult to determine jurisdiction for the families and the investigations.

Families could attempt to declare the waiver invalid in the US and file a lawsuit there, or in their home countries, but any disputes connected to the waivers would likely be regulated by the laws of the Bahamas, where OceanGate is registered.

OceanGate can be sued for $100 million: Legal expert

Families might earn more than $100 million if they sue OceanGate, according to US legal expert Dr. Nick Oberheiden of Federal-lawyer.com. They could also decide to pursue their claim as a collective claim, which might increase their chances of success by pooling resources. OceanGate executives Scott Griffiths, Doug Gorder, and ex-NASA astronaut Scott Parazynski are among those who might be named in any legal action, although there hasn't been any indication that any of them will be named.

The Associated Press has examined one of the liability releases, which required participants to accept hazards associated with the voyage aboard the Titan and any support vessels. It was signed by a person who intended to participate in an OceanGate mission.

Also read: Doomed Titanic submersible explainer: What is an implosion, was it preventable, what happens next and more

According to the waiver, while travelling on the Titan, passengers could sustain physical harm, mental or emotional suffering, or even pass away. Additionally, travellers give up their right to sue over "personal injury, property damage, or any other loss" they sustain while travelling. Further, it is made explicit on the form that the boat is experimental and was "constructed of materials that have not been widely used for manned submersibles."

A CBS reporter who travelled in July 2022 with OceanGate Expeditions claimed that the release he signed made three references to the chance of death on the first page alone.

Titan accident's findings will impact legal claims

According to legal experts, the accident investigation's findings will have a significant impact on any legal claims made by families, including the reason of the ship's implosion. Before engaging in risky leisure activities like skydiving or scuba diving, liability releases, also known as release forms, are customary. Passengers often accept the risk and perils associated with the activity by signing the form, and if they are hurt, they release the business owner from liability.

Before engaging in any kind of "ultra-hazardous recreational activity," Matthew Shaffer, a trial lawyer with the marine personal injury litigation firm Schechter, Shaffer and Harris, told The Daily Mail that the papers are typical.

"A good release will cover any and all potential harm and you are going to spell it out in simple language as possible. You can get killed. You can get hurt. You can get maimed and you are not going to have any recourse. You're releasing us of any liability for anything bad that is going to happen to you as a result of you engaging in this activity," he said.

Also read: US tycoon turned down cheap tickets on doomed Titanic submersible; shares chilling texts with Stockton Rush

Legal professionals claim that the legality of these documents is based on the jurisdiction in which they are signed. In US cases involving scuba divers in Florida and skiers in Colorado, signed waivers have been upheld. A court compares the document to other elements, such as whether the signer knew what they were agreeing to and the risks they were incurring, as well as how uncommon and risky the conduct was.

According to Shaffer, a court will also take into account if an owner or operator intentionally concealed information from the passenger or put the passenger in danger. Whether there was "gross negligence involved" is a different matter.

Regardless of whether a waiver existed, Shaffer and others have stated that they anticipate families of those who perished aboard the submersible to file lawsuits against not only OceanGate but also the company that built the submersible and businesses that supplied its parts.

"The waiver is certainly going to be a significant factor stemming from this disaster and it depends a lot on the court and the facts that come out," he told The Daily Mail.

However, waivers are not necessarily irrevocable, and judges frequently reject them if there is proof of flagrant negligence or risks that were not properly explained.

"If there were aspects of the design or construction of this vessel that were kept from the passengers or it was knowingly operated despite information that it was not suitable for this dive, that would absolutely go against the validity of the waiver," he added.

What could OceanGate argue?

OceanGate can contend that it was not egregiously negligent and that the waivers are valid since they fully disclosed the risks associated with exploring the deepest parts of the ocean in a minivan-sized submersible. The extent of any probable negligence and how it would affect whether the exemptions are applicable will be determined by the disaster's causes, which are currently being investigated.

"There are so many different examples of what families might still have claims for despite the waivers, but until we know the cause we can't determine whether the waivers apply," personal injury lawyer Joseph Low of California told The Daily Mail.

Also read: 5 dead after ill-fated Titanic submersible's 'catastrophic implosion'; major pieces of Titan found

It is unknown if OceanGate, a small business with headquarters in Everett, Washington, has the financial resources to cover large damages should any be granted. Families, however, might be able to get compensation from the business' insurance plan.

If third parties were determined to have been culpable and responsible for the Titan's collapse, the families of those who lost loved ones could also pursue damages from them. 

By bringing a "limitation of liability action," which allows owners of vessels involved in accidents to urge a federal court to limit any damages to the present value of the vessel, OceanGate could attempt to protect itself from liability claims. In light of the Titan's destruction, that would equal zero.

However, OceanGate would bear the burden of evidence and would need to demonstrate that it was unaware of any potential flaws in the submersible, which, according to legal experts, would be a challenging duty to meet.

Families would be allowed to bring wrongful death or negligence claims if OceanGate were to lose this particular case.

The Death on the High Seas Act, another maritime legislation, permits individuals who were financially reliant on a person who perished in a maritime catastrophe to only pursue the portion of future earnings that they would have otherwise received. In those circumstances, plaintiffs are not entitled to damages for pain and suffering.

The main inquiries during discovery, a procedure where parties discuss information about a case, would be what OceanGate knew regarding the safety of the vessel and what the passengers were told about it.

In a 2018 lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington against the corporation, plaintiffs might mention claims of safety violations at OceanGate made by a former worker. David Lochridge, the employee, claimed he voiced "serious safety concerns" but they were disregarded. Court records show that matter was resolved in an undisclosed manner.

In 2018, a number of business titans also wrote to OceanGate to voice their extreme worries about the Titan's safety and the company's decision to forgo certification of the vessel through third parties like the American Bureau of Shipping, a prominent submersible classifier.

Disaster in international waters a complication

The recent disaster's location in international waters is a problematic element. Any issues would be regulated by the laws of the Bahamas, where OceanGate Expeditions Ltd is registered, according to the waiver the Associated Press read.

"If the law of the Bahamas is not favorable to the families, then I predict they will bring a lawsuit in the United States or their home countries," Kenneth Abraham, the Harrison Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law told The Daily Mail.

The legal case may then include declaring the waiver unenforceable in the US, he said.

Also read: Demystifying the implosion that sank Titan submarine on Titanic tour

However, given the difficulties in establishing jurisdiction, Steve Flynn, a retired Coast Guard officer and the head of Northeastern University's Global Resilience Institute, warned that any cases might not succeed. "The implosion happened 'basically in a regulatory no man's land," noted Flynn.

"There was essentially no oversight. To some extent, they leveraged the murkiness of jurisdiction to not have oversight," he told The Daily Mail.

With OceanGate CEO among those dead, who will families sue?

Whether OceanGate endures and, if so, who to sue are further issues, according to Flynn. Stockton Rush, the company's top executive, was one among the five passengers that perished. 

According to Richard Daynard, distinguished professor at Northeastern University School of Law, even if the ship does survive, OceanGate is unlikely to be held accountable in court unless the company misrepresented the safety of the vessel. The case, he continued, is otherwise a shining illustration of the explorer's assumption of risk.

According to Daynard, the corporation, which shut down its Washington office in the wake of the implosion news, might also not be able to cover losses.

"If they were held liable, my guess would be they would be unlikely to have the many, many millions of dollars that if I were on a jury I would award," he told The Daily Mail.

Millions of dollars will be spent on the hunt by the US Coast Guard alone. Additionally rushing to offer resources and experience were the US Navy, the Canadian Coast Guard, and other government and corporate organisations.

There was no other ocean search like it, according to Virginia-based naval historian, analyst, and author Norman Polmar, especially given the number of nations and even businesses involved.

Some organisations may request compensation, but according to Stephen Koerting, a US attorney in Maine who specialised in maritime law, the US Coast Guard is typically banned by federal law from collecting repayment relative to any search or rescue service.

According to documents the corporation sent to a US District Court in Norfolk, Virginia, which is in charge of handling cases surrounding the Titanic catastrophe, at least 46 persons successfully travelled aboard OceanGate's submersible to the Titanic wreck site in 2021 and 2022.