Conflict Lawsuit Petition

THE ISTANBUL ANADOLU PRIMARY COMMERCIAL COURT

(IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE MARITIME SPECIALIZED COURT)

PLAINTIFF: [Name of the Ship Operating Company] (Address: …………………………………………………………………)

ATTORNEY: Attorney Aydanur NAS (Address: …………………………………………………………………)

DEFENDANT: [Name of the Company Operating the Opposite Vessel] (Address: …………………………………………………………………)

SUBJECT: This lawsuit seeks the recovery from the defendant, the ship operator , of the total amount of [Amount] USD in damages to the client's vessel and cargo, plus interest, resulting from a collision caused entirely by the defendant's fault

EXPENSE BASIS: [Figure].000.00 USD (Subject to our rights and claims regarding any excess amount, for the time being.)

EXPLANATIONS

This lawsuit seeks compensation for material damages suffered by the client company as a result of a collision that occurred during the voyage of ships, subject to the provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK). Our petition has been prepared within the framework of the special maritime law provisions of the TTK, the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG), and established Supreme Court precedents.

I. MANNER OF THE INCIDENT AND SOURCE OF THE DAMAGE

A. Date and Location of the Collision: The bulk carrier M/V POSEIDON, owned by the client company, collided with the dry cargo ship M/V ATEŞ, owned by the defendant company, on November 12, 2024, in the Marmara Sea, near the southern approach point of the Dardanelles Strait, at coordinates 40°25′ N – 026°40′ E.

B. Prior Situation and Navigation Information: The client vessel, M/V POSEIDON, was en route from Haydarpaşa Port to İskenderun Port. At the time of the collision, the sea conditions were light windy, visibility was clear, and navigation conditions were normal. The client vessel was fully complying with the traffic regulations in the area and was sailing at a safe speed.

C. Defendant Vessel's Fully Negligent Maneuver: Upon examination of the incident report, VDR (Navigational Data Recorder), and AIS (Automatic Identification System) records, it was determined that the primary and sole cause of the collision was the grossly negligent actions of the captain and crew of the defendant vessel, M/V ATEŞ. These negligences are as follows:

Inadequate Lookout and Lack of Attention (Violation of COLREG Rule 5): The respondent vessel, M/V ATEŞ, violated its obligation to maintain adequate lookout at all times as mandated by Rule 5. Although the client vessel's course and speed were clearly visible on radar and visually, the respondent vessel delayed in detecting the danger and failed to take the necessary maneuver.
Violation of the Right of Way Rule (Violation of COLREG Rules 15 and 16): On the course where the collision occurred, the defendant vessel M/V ATEŞ, to yield , maintained its course and did not make any early and adequate maneuvers to yield.
Late and Inadequate Maneuvering: Even at the moment of dangerous approach, the defendant vessel, instead of performing a maneuver of sufficient magnitude and capacity to prevent a collision, made the collision inevitable through inadequate and incorrect maneuvers at the last moment. This action of the defendant vessel clearly violates Article 1289/1-3 of the Turkish Commercial Code.

II. LEGAL GROUNDS AND PRINCIPLES OF LIABILITY

A. Collision Provisions and Unilateral Fault: Collision is a maritime accident as defined in Article 1286 of the Turkish Commercial Code, and the principles of liability are regulated in Article 1287. In our case, the collision occurred due to the full fault of the defendant vessel (M/V ATEŞ)

Article 1287/2 of the Turkish Commercial Code states: "If the collision is caused by the fault of one of the vessels, the operator of that vessel shall compensate for the damage." The evidence in the case file (VDR and expert reports) will prove that the sole cause of the collision was the defendant vessel's gross negligence in violating maritime regulations. Therefore, the defendant is liable for the entire damage to the client vessel and its cargo, in accordance with Article 1287/2 of the Turkish Commercial Code.

B. Strict Liability of the Captain and Operator (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1289/1): The Turkish Commercial Code holds the ship operator liable for damages arising from the actions of the captain and crew members that violate maritime regulations. The defendant operator is obligated to compensate for damages resulting from the gross negligence of the crew members.

C. Priority of International Conventions (COLREG/Turkish Commercial Code Article 1289/3): The COLREG Rules are part of our domestic law by virtue of the reference in the Turkish Commercial Code. The violation of fundamental rules such as Rule 5 (Lookout) and Rule 15 (Cross-Passage) by the defendant seafarers constitutes gross negligence contrary to maritime trade customs, and this is sufficient ground for liability to arise.

III. ITEMS OF DAMAGES AND CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION

The client vessel, M/V POSEIDON, sustained significant damage to its port bow shoulder as a result of the collision, preventing it from continuing its voyage. The total damage incurred by the client as a result of the collision [Figure].000.00 USD , the details of which are presented below:

1. Actual Repair Costs of the Ship: Following the collision, the ship was taken to the dry dock at Tuzla Shipyard and repaired under the supervision of the Classification Society Lloyd's Register.

Drydocking and Shipyard Expenses: [Figure] USD
Steel Replacement and Welding Works: [Figure] USD
Machinery and Equipment Damages: [Figure] USD
Subtotal (Repair): [Figure].000 USD

2. Detention Damage (Loss of Hire): The vessel suffered a loss of earnings because it could not be chartered during the repair period (total [Duration – e.g., 90 days]).

Daily Charter Fee (Market average): 15,000 USD/day
Total Lost Earnings: 90 days x $15,000 = $1,350,000

3. Cargo Damage: A portion of the cargo carried on board [Cargo Type – E.g., 5000 tons of wheat] has been damaged and rendered unusable due to contact with seawater caused by a rupture resulting from the collision.

Value of Damaged Cargo (According to insurance adjuster reports): [Figure] USD

4. Expertise, Legal and Assistance Expenses: Post-collision emergency response, salvage (if applicable), surveyor (expert) fees, port charges, legal consultancy and agency fees: [Amount] USD

TOTAL DAMAGES (Repairs + Detention + Loading + Expenses): [Amount].000.00 USD

IV. PRECEDENT-SETTING SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND LEGAL GROUNDS

The following are consistent precedents from the Court of Cassation regarding liability for collision, supporting the client's claim:

A. Detection of Defect and Priority of COLREG Violation:

Turkish Supreme Court, 11th Civil Chamber (Case No. 2020/5481, Decision No. 2021/3055): “In collision cases, the determination of fault primarily depends on whether the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG) rules have been strictly complied with. A vessel that violates COLREG rules is considered at fault to the extent that this violation establishes a causal link in the occurrence of the collision. In particular, the neglect of the obligations of safe speed and adequate lookout (Rules 5 and 6) is considered a cause of gross negligence.”

B. Compensation for Detention (Loss of Earnings):

The Supreme Court of Turkey, General Assembly of Law (E. 2017/11-1250, K. 2019/33), ruled that "the lost earnings of a ship during the period it is unable to sail due to repairs as a result of a collision (detention damages) are a direct consequence of the negligent act that caused the collision and are included in the scope of damages. In calculating these damages, the repair period of the ship and the reasonable market rates it could have earned during this period should be taken into account."

C. The Presence of a Pilot Does Not Remove the Captain's Responsibility:

Turkish Supreme Court, 11th Civil Chamber (Case No. 2018/1922, Decision No. 2020/5243): “The presence of a pilot on board during a voyage does not negate the captain's ultimate legal responsibility for safe navigation at sea. The captain is obligated to intervene in the pilot's clearly erroneous and dangerous maneuvers. This responsibility is essential for the continuation of the ship operator's strict liability.”

D. Determination of Fault Rating and Assessment of Total Fault:

Turkish Supreme Court, 11th Civil Chamber (Case No. 2021/1188, Decision No. 2022/751) : “In cases where joint fault is not present, if a definite causal link is established between the action of one party that clearly violates maritime rules and the damage suffered by the other party, the principle of unilateral fault applies, and the culpable party is held responsible for the entire damage. In cases where the fault of a single vessel is decisive in making the collision unavoidable, Article 1287/2 of the Turkish Commercial Code applies.”

V. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND JURISDICTION

A. Special Statute of Limitations: According to Article 1292 of the Turkish Commercial Code, claims for damages due to collision are subject to a special statute of limitations of two years (2 years) from the date of the incident . The collision occurred on [Date: 12.11.2024], and this lawsuit was filed within this period, taking into account the provisions of the statutory statute of limitations.

B. Competent and Authorized Court: Since the case arises from a collision, which is a commercial matter, the Commercial Court of First Instance has jurisdiction. Although the court of the first port of call of the defendant vessel or the court of the business's headquarters is also competent due to the proximity of the collision site to the Sea of Marmara and the intensity of maritime trade, this case has been filed in the Istanbul Anatolian Commercial Court of First Instance (acting as a Maritime Specialized Court), which is close to the commercial center of the ship operator.

VI. LEGAL EVIDENCE

The following evidence will be relied upon to prove our legal claims:

VDR (Voyage Data Recorder) Records: Immediate retrieval and examination of the VDR records of the defendant vessel M/V ATEŞ.
AIS (Automatic Identification System) Records: AIS data from both vessels at the time of the incident and third-party AIS station records (obtained from the General Directorate of Coastal Safety/Turkey's Coast Guard).
Ship Logs (Navigation Log, Engine Log): Examination of the logs of both ships relating to the time of the incident.
Official Reports: On-site and damage assessment reports prepared by the Coast Guard Command, the Port Authority, and the Surveyor (Expert) Organization.
Expert Review: Determination of fault, precise calculation of repair times and detention damages through experts specializing in maritime law and shipbuilding/machinery.
Contracts and Invoices: All invoices and contracts relating to the vessel's damage repair (dry dock/shipyard invoice), documents relating to salvage/towing expenses, and charter agreements relating to lost charter revenue.
Supreme Court and Precedent Court Decisions: (The rulings mentioned in the petition will be submitted later).
Oath and all other legal evidence.

CONCLUSION AND REQUEST:

For the reasons detailed above;

We request that our case be ACCEPTED .
The total damages incurred by the client company , amounting to [Amount].000.00 USD , shall be collected from the defendant, together with the highest rediscount interest rate applicable from the date of collision, 12.11.2024
I respectfully request and demand, on behalf of my client, that the court order the defendant to pay the court costs and attorney's fees.

…/…./2025

Plaintiff's Attorney Aydanur NAS

Brussels Convention on Collision, collision, statute of limitations for collision cases

Law Articles