Negligence Decision- Ruby Princess

[BruceK]

A Court has ruled, in a class action case, that Princess/Carnival was negligent, breaching its duty of care, to operate the Ruby Princess cruise in early 2020 which infected around 600 pax and led to the death of 28 pax due to Covid. It is reported as the first such decision anywhere in the world.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10...assengers-win-class-action-carnival/103018412.
Waiting to see if the same lawyers bring a class action for the October/November 2022 Majestic Princess cruise which infected around 800 pax including my partner and me, and an unstated number of crew.
Interesting that here in the western Pacific, the reported major infections on ships have involved Princess, Grand, Ruby, Majestic, and I think one other. Maybe the area is most frequented by Princess, maybe it`s something else.

 

[AlaskaProf]

Thanks for the update.

 

[Benthic2]

I do not think negligence could be assigned to your cruise as it was to the one in 2020. At that time the disease was stronger and less was known about Covid. By the time 2022 rolls around anyone that went on a cruise knew what they signed up for.

 

[READY]

I suspect that by late 2022 the contract you signed had some explicit language addressing Covid risk and a broad waiver of any right to bring suit.

 

[psneeld]

From my experience, liabiloty waivers are often easily overcome.

 

[BruceK]

In 2022 Princess was taking some easily thwarted steps directed to Covid making it/not making it onboard. So it was different but, didn`t succeed. When we photographed ourselves holding a negative RAT and a time/date identifier we saw how easy it was to fake it.
By law, liability "waivers" are construed/read down against the interests of the party seeking to rely on them. If a 2022 class action emerges we`ll be interested. An important question will be, was there Covid on board when we boarded? There sure was for the people who were boarded the day we disembarked, but the cruise went ahead, with hundreds more disembarking Covid positive at the next port in Melbourne.

 

[SteveK]

Bruce, do you know any good lawyers, retired, who could initiate a class action suit?

 

[BruceK]

Bruce, do you know any good lawyers, retired, who could initiate a class action suit?

Not my area. Class actions here are run by a small number of specialized "now win no fee" law firms, backed by specialized funders. Saving grace, the area is somewhat regulated and class action settlements have to be approved by a Court as in the interests of the class members.
In fairness, Princess offered a credit of about $500 for another cruise, for our 4-5 days cabin confinement, lost prepaid special dining, sickness, etc. My antiviral meds cost the Government medication scheme (PBS) over $1000.

 

[SteveK]

Not my area. Class actions here are run by a small number of specialized "now win no fee" law firms, backed by specialized funders. Saving grace, the area is somewhat regulated and class action settlements have to be approved by a Court as in the interests of the class members.
In fairness, Princess offered a credit of about $500 for another cruise, for our 4-5 days cabin confinement, lost prepaid special dining, sickness, etc. My antiviral meds cost the Government medication scheme (PBS) over $1000.

But wasn't it a nurse that started the other one, surely you would have an edge on others on filing the papers. Just a thought.

 

[BruceK]

But wasn't it a nurse that started the other one, surely you would have an edge on others on filing the papers. Just a thought.

Not a thought I`d entertain.

 

[READY]

We thought about taking advantage of the great rates offered when the ships opened back up but it seemed highly probable covid would spread regardless of any reasonable precaution that was likely for such a mass gathering as a cruise.

I really struggle with the concept of blaming the cruise line. To my knowledge no passengers were forced to take the cruise and unless someone had spent the last several years living under a rock they must have been aware there was risk of a covid outbreak.

I attendeed a large trade show in Jan 2022 and they also engaged in "screening" by having you submit a photo of your covid test. There are so many reasons this was no guarantee. Even today with the most and best vaccines and testing, any large confined event is likely to result in some transmission. At some point we as a society need to accept that things happen and we cannot always expect another party to pay out.

I thought it was good that the Australian Court limited the award to her medical cost.

We all have to cover the costs associated with liability claims. We feel it in our insurance bills, cost of products or even the withdrawal of products from the market due to risk management.

I am all for a legal system that protects the population from unscrupulous manufacturers or shear negligence. But too often I think the pendulum swings too far.

Ok, stepping down from my soapbox now...Maybe next I will post about the best anchor!

 

[Insequent]

A good development, but a long time coming and it may not be the last word.

I'd encourage people to read the newspaper article in the link in Bruce's first post. Excellent info - eg lead claimant only received medical costs because in her case the covid was mild.

I have no sympathy at all for Princess/Carnival....

 

[BruceK]

...I attended a large trade show in Jan 2022 and they also engaged in "screening" by having you submit a photo of your covid test. There are so many reasons this was no guarantee. Even today with the most and best vaccines and testing, any large confined event is likely to result in some transmission. At some point we as a society need to accept that things happen and we cannot always expect another party to pay out.

I thought it was good that the Australian Court limited the award to her medical cost.

We all have to cover the costs associated with liability claims. We feel it in our insurance bills, cost of products or even the withdrawal of products from the market due to risk management.

I am all for a legal system that protects the population from unscrupulous manufacturers or shear negligence. But too often I think the pendulum swings too far. ...

The Court found Princess was negligent to even operate the 2020 cruise. Each claimant`s case on damages is decided individually, the award of only medical expenses is not punitive, it`s likely the particular lead plaintiff did not meet the threshold for general damages. Others may, as may relatives/dependents of the 28 dead passengers.
I think there may be differentiation for passengers who bought tickets under US law. How I know not but perhaps, in line with your views, US citizens could be denied compensation.

 

[hollywood8118]

So, who gets aboard a cruise ship during a pandemic and doesn't expect to get covid?
Those things are a breeding ground for all kinds of sickness.

Having hope that anybody can guard us in any situation such as covid or any contagious situation is a stretch.


Hollywood

 

[soin2la]

From my experience, liabiloty waivers are often easily overcome.

Can you expand on "easily overcome," from your experience?

 

[Pete Meisinger]

It is interesting, lots of people have signed various "waivers". Like "I agree to hold the owner of this bungie jump place harmless" etc.

Fact of the matter is that you can't sign away your rights.

The waiver may come back to haunt you at some time but it really doesn't sign away your rights.

pete

 

[BruceK]

It is interesting, lots of people have signed various "waivers". Like "I agree to hold the owner of this bungie jump place harmless" etc.

Fact of the matter is that you can't sign away your rights.

The waiver may come back to haunt you at some time but it really doesn't sign away your rights.

pete

I suggest TF members/observers exercise caution following the advice above.

 

[psneeld]

Can you expand on "easily overcome," from your experience?

When explained to me by a judge and seemingky many law suits,, unless proven that you clearly understood the waiver and had the opportunity to review and question, they are often not airtight. There's no guarantee you can easily ovrcome every type or all waivers, but seems that they are not as airtight as open and shut. Contracts seem to suffer in the same way as alsi people joke about pre-nuptual agreements.

The judge's favoright example was luggage liability when you traveled by air that was printed on the back of your ticket...and back in the day no one explained that it was there.

Also...even if the waiver is airtight, again in my experience it seems like settlements happen when there shouldn,'t be a need for one.

https://www.vilesandbeckman.com/blo...xt=The Limits of a Release,can be a fine line.

The Limits of a Release of Liability Waiver

Release of liability waivers cover only ordinary negligence. If a business commits gross negligence or intentional harm, the release of liability waiver is no longer applicable. The difference between ordinary and gross negligence can be a fine line.

 

[Steamguy]

Did cruise during Covid

So, who gets aboard a cruise ship during a pandemic and doesn't expect to get covid?
Those things are a breeding ground for all kinds of sickness.

Having hope that anybody can guard us in any situation such as covid or any contagious situation is a stretch.


Hollywood

In Sept-Oct 2021 the wife and I went on a cruise from Malta up the Adriatic visiting 4 cities in Croatia and back. Felt perfectly safe because it was a Viking Ocean cruise, and the prevention protocols were unbelievable. It's all about how the cruise line values it's passengers.

 

[BruceK]

Sometimes so called "waivers" are only drawn to the customers attention AFTER the contract has been formed. Those are easily disposed of.
Steamguy may be right. A Princess ship is reported to have docked in Adelaide in Australia with both Covid and gastro onboard. Though diarrhea being a concomitant/symptom of Covid, not sure how you`d tell for sure you had both.

 

[mvweebles]

When explained to me by a judge and seemingky many law suits,, unless proven that you clearly understood the waiver and had the opportunity to review and question, they are often not airtight. There's no guarantee you can easily ovrcome every type or all waivers, but seems that they are not as airtight as open and shut. Contracts seem to suffer in the same way as alsi people joke about pre-nuptual agreements.

The judge's favoright example was luggage liability when you traveled by air that was printed on the back of your ticket...and back in the day no one explained that it was there.

Also...even if the waiver is airtight, again in my experience it seems like settlements happen when there shouldn,'t be a need for one.

https://www.vilesandbeckman.com/blo...xt=The Limits of a Release,can be a fine line.

The Limits of a Release of Liability Waiver

Release of liability waivers cover only ordinary negligence. If a business commits gross negligence or intentional harm, the release of liability waiver is no longer applicable. The difference between ordinary and gross negligence can be a fine line.

Gross negligence is a pretty high bar and is often underpinned by serious misrepresentation or dereliction. Or chronic disregard of duties (such as the famous McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit that resulted in an extreme judgement against McDonald's, later overturned).

But I do agree that normal liability waivers are far from airtight and can be overcome. First, the document itself is interpreted against the party who drafted it. Second, it doesn't absolve the party from taking ordinary care. In a very simple example, let's say you sign a waiver about an apartment complex where you rent. One morning a couple days after a snowstorm, you slip on ice in a common area and get hurt. The apartment complex will immediately wave the liability waiver. But since they didn't take ordinary care to shovel the walks, the waiver means nothing. Expand the example a bit to say there's an area where snowmelt pools and freezes and the apartment manager is aware of many people slipping and falling as a result. The line between negligence and gross negligence has arguably been crossed.

Perhaps the biggest difference between negligence and gross negligence is addition of punitive damages over and above compensatory damages (again, the McDonald's coffee suit).

Peter

 

[Benthic2]

It's been a while since I took Business Law ( or stayed at a Holiday Inn ) but I believe the concept of duress can be used to make a waiver invalid. If you can't get on the cruise without agreeing to the waiver, after you have saved, planned and paid for it, you are essentially being extorted by the cruise line into signing, and may not feel like you have a choice.
( if anyone with real legal experience disagrees with this, believe them, not me)

 

[Brisyboy]

Sometimes so called "waivers" are only drawn to the customers attention AFTER the contract has been formed. Those are easily disposed of.
Steamguy may be right. A Princess ship is reported to have docked in Adelaide in Australia with both Covid and gastro onboard. Though diarrhea being a concomitant/symptom of Covid, not sure how you`d tell for sure you had both.

Agree Bruce, it would be a toughie to tell them apart - perhaps they would only use one swab - better ask them to do the nose first though.........

 

[AlaskaProf]

Agree Bruce, it would be a toughie to tell them apart - perhaps they would only use one swab - better ask them to do the nose first though.........

EEEuuw!

 

[psneeld]

Gross negligence is a pretty high bar and is often underpinned by serious misrepresentation or dereliction. Or chronic disregard of duties (such as the famous McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit that resulted in an extreme judgement against McDonald's, later overturned).

But I do agree that normal liability waivers are far from airtight and can be overcome. First, the document itself is interpreted against the party who drafted it. Second, it doesn't absolve the party from taking ordinary care. In a very simple example, let's say you sign a waiver about an apartment complex where you rent. One morning a couple days after a snowstorm, you slip on ice in a common area and get hurt. The apartment complex will immediately wave the liability waiver. But since they didn't take ordinary care to shovel the walks, the waiver means nothing. Expand the example a bit to say there's an area where snowmelt pools and freezes and the apartment manager is aware of many people slipping and falling as a result. The line between negligence and gross negligence has arguably been crossed.

Perhaps the biggest difference between negligence and gross negligence is addition of punitive damages over and above compensatory damages (again, the McDonald's coffee suit).

Peter

The difference between negligence and gross negligence is probably determined by how good or bad the lawyers and expert witnesses are.... the truth and reasonableness are irrelevant....and probably why most cases are settled.

 

[BruceK]

Australia is in the grip of another Covid wave,expected to peak around Christmas. We caught it while touring Tasmania(island State to the south of the mainland), either on the overnight Spirit of Tasmania car ferry(which crosses the notoriously rough Bass Strait from mainland to Tassie and vv), or on land in Launceston.
The P&O ship Pacific Adventure, an ex Princess hand down, was refused entry into NZ, not due to covid but due to the bio hazard growing on its hull,and has diverted to Tasmania. Take care while ashore.