This tiny submarine 2.4 miles under the sea, visiting the relics of RMS Titanic. Can it be found and the crew saved before the air runs out?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

slowmotion

Quite dreadful
Location
lost somewhere
On the ship in international waters.

The four punters happened to be wandering about a few hundred miles from Newfoundland, came across a bloke with a small submarine, a pen and a piece of paper, and signed up on a whim to go and visit the Titanic? Now that is impressive spontaneity.
 

Ming the Merciless

There is no mercy
Location
Inside my skull
The four punters happened to be wandering about a few hundred miles from Newfoundland, came across a bloke with a small submarine, a pen and a piece of paper, and signed up on a whim to go and visit the Titanic? Now that is impressive spontaneity.

No that’s not how it was done but the disclaimers were done on the ship. Just like I could sign up and pay to climb Everest, but would not necessarily sign anything as a disclaimer till in country.

They weren’t advertising in submarine weekly, and posting out the forms via international post and waiting it to be posted back. Some things you do upfront some things you do much nearer the time.

Ocean gate were exploiting the grey areas and gaps to avoid scrutiny and the question remains to to whether suing or making a claim in anywhere other than the Bahamas has any validity.
 
Last edited:

Profpointy

Legendary Member
My understanding, for the UK at least, is that a waiver will not absolve the organiser from their responsibility of a duty of care to the participants and they can still face claims arising through, for example, negligence, inadequate training, dangerous or faulty equipment etc.

That's totally true. ... however in English Tort law there also something called "violenti fit injuria" (or something like that and likely spelled wrong) which essentially means if you willingly do something inherently dangerous, you can't (usually) sue the provider. An example was a case of a drunken pair going up in a light aircraft, which duly crashed, but the passenger failed to sue the drunken pilot as he'd willing gone along with the stupidity. That was on the specific case and likely doesn't necessarily apply for passengers of drunk drivers. Tort judgements can depend a lot on fickle judges who make it up as they go along according to their prejudices, but I would expect the argument to be "it was jointly undertaken risky adventure" vs "he was a paying passenger same as the Isle of Wight ferry". In any case is there anyone (with money) to sue ?
 
There's actually a certain US court that has already been assigned jurisdiction with oceangate. I can't recall the name but there's something to do with the company, contracts or other matters which meant this court has jurisdiction. No legal expert just something I read or heard on TV.
 

Ming the Merciless

There is no mercy
Location
Inside my skull
Mind it just gets better and better

IMG_5315.jpeg
 

Bonefish Blues

Banging donk
Location
52 Festive Road
Waivers are much more enforceable in the US Courts, but still able to be challenged if it were for instance a case of reckless endangerment.

However as the saying goes, it's no use pursuing a man of straw, so who would be the target of any action, cos sure as eggs is eggs there's no insurance in place.
 

Ming the Merciless

There is no mercy
Location
Inside my skull
Not sure why they think USA law is applicable. They didn’t even sail from the USA on the support ship (not owned or run by OceanGate), plus accident happened in International waters on a sub that flew no flag, by a company registered in the Bahamas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom