The High Court has ruled that Bahamian law governs a cruise passenger’s claims in defamation, false imprisonment and assault and battery over events alleged to have occurred aboard a ship in August 2015. The court decided which law applies; it did not determine whether the alleged torts occurred or whether the claims succeed.
The proceedings were brought by Caroline Fanning against Trailfinders Ireland Limited, with RCL Cruises Limited joined as a third party. Fanning booked a package holiday that included a Caribbean cruise aboard the Oasis of the Seas. She and her daughter were disembarked in Nassau on the captain’s order on 9 August 2015.
The parties agreed that Irish law governed the contract claim and the negligence claim. They disputed the law applicable to the other tort claims. Fanning argued that Irish law applied, including because of her prior contractual relationship with the tour organiser. The defendant and RCL argued that Bahamian law applied because the ship was registered in the Bahamas and flew its flag, and the alleged events occurred aboard it.
Before deciding that dispute, the court considered Fanning’s application to reopen the choice-of-law motion. She asked the judge to consider a clause in the separate contract between the defendant and RCL, which provided for Irish law to govern certain claims. The judgment records that the cruise company’s standard terms were not incorporated into Fanning’s contract with the tour organiser. The court refused the application, finding the contract was known when the original motion was heard and Fanning could not enforce an agreement to which she was not a party.
On the choice-of-law motion, the court held that the law of the ship’s flag applied to the claims arising from alleged torts within the shipboard maritime venture. As the Oasis of the Seas was registered in the Bahamas and flew the Bahamian flag, the court ruled that the law of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas governs the defamation, false imprisonment and assault and battery claims. It also said the alleged damage most likely occurred in Bahamian territorial waters, which would independently point to Bahamian law under the relevant EU regulation.
The court noted that Irish procedural law governs the mode of trial and that the defendant had accepted the claims could be tried by a judge and jury even if Bahamian law applied. It said it did not need to decide that issue; its comments on jury trial were obiter. The order addressed the governing law only, leaving the underlying claims for later determination.