Teng He: Apportionment of Responsibility in Negligence Case Involving Damage to Submerged Seismic Cables

In the case of *Teng He*, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal regarding the apportionment of liability for damage to submerged seismic cables. The respondents, owners of the cables, sought damages from the appellants, owners of the *Teng He*, for the damage caused by the *Tai He* when it severed the cables. The High Court had previously found the appellants 60% liable and the respondents 40% liable. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, reversing the apportionment and holding the respondents 60% liable and the appellants 40% liable, finding the respondents' failure to dive the cables as a critical act of negligence.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal

1.2 Outcome

Appeal allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Court of Appeal apportioned liability for damage to submerged seismic cables, finding the respondents primarily responsible due to their negligence.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Chao Hick TinJustice of AppealYes
L P TheanJustice of AppealNo
Yong Pung HowChief JusticeNo

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The respondents were conducting seismic survey activities in the Bo Hai Gulf.
  2. The respondents' vessel, Nordic Explorer, towed seven underwater seismic cables.
  3. The appellants' vessel, Tai He, severed the submerged cables.
  4. The Nordic Explorer had dived its cables to avoid collision with another vessel shortly before the incident.
  5. The Nordic Explorer crew were distracted by a 'ghost' vessel on their radar.
  6. The Nordic Explorer failed to dive the cables in time to avoid the Tai He.
  7. The Tai He was proceeding at a speed of 17.5 knots in conditions of poor visibility.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Teng He, CA 7/2000, [2000] SGCA 53

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Tai He severed submerged cables towed by Nordic Explorer in the Bo Hai Gulf.
High Court held the appellants liable for 60% of the damage and the respondents for 40%.
Exploration activities of another survey vessel, the `Jinxing No. 2`.
Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, reversing the apportionment of liability.
Nordic Explorer installed replacements.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found both parties contributorily negligent, but ultimately held the respondents primarily liable.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to keep proper watch
      • Failure to give due warning
  2. Contributory Negligence
    • Outcome: The court apportioned responsibility for the damage, assigning 60% liability to the respondents and 40% to the appellants.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Apportionment of responsibility

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Negligence

10. Practice Areas

  • Shipping Law
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Shipping
  • Oil and Gas

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Teng HeHigh CourtYes[2000] 3 SLR 114SingaporeCited as the judgment under appeal, detailing the High Court's initial apportionment of liability.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Seismic cables
  • Contributory negligence
  • Apportionment of liability
  • Navigational warnings
  • Chase boats
  • Diving cables
  • Poor visibility
  • Inadequate lookout

15.2 Keywords

  • Negligence
  • Shipping
  • Seismic Cables
  • Apportionment
  • Maritime Law

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Shipping
  • Negligence
  • Admiralty
  • Maritime Law