Ever-Given - Top maritime lawyer: "Seizure has nothing to do with piracy"

Egypt has confiscated the Ever Given.

The country wants to emphasize its demand for damages worth millions.

The procedure is controversial in the industry.

Malmö / Munich

- In the dispute over the claims for damages against the owners of the container giant Ever Given, the maritime law expert Henning Jessen defended the actions of the Egyptian authorities.

The seizure of the Ever Given by the authorities complied with applicable maritime law, the professor of maritime law at the World Maritime University in Malmö told

Merkur.de

.

Fixing a ship to enforce maritime claims is "not an unusual process," said Jessen on Wednesday.

The move corresponds to the "International Convention for the Standardization of Rules on Arrest in Sea Ships" of 1952. The set of rules has been ratified by over 80 countries, including Egypt and Germany.

Ever Given: Seizure in accordance with the law of the sea

The Ever Given was confiscated as part of a "judicial procedure in the arresting state".

This has nothing to do with arbitrariness or even “piracy”, said the doctor of maritime law.

With this, Jessen countered the assessments of industry representatives in the USA and Sweden, who had accused Egypt of questionable handling of the law of the sea.

That was out of the question, said Jessen.

At most, the amount of the compensation claimed is doubtful.

The Egyptian Suez Canal Authority originally called a good $ 900 million, but has since apparently reduced the amount to $ 600 million.

The Japanese shipowners Shoei Kisen Kaisha, however, want to pay only 100 million dollars, according to media reports.

The actual damage will "probably be well below $ 200 million," said Jessen.

Ever Green, around 400 meters long, had crossed a one-lane stretch of the canal after a sensational course at the end of March and wedged between the banks.

As a result, one of the most important waterways in the world was blocked for days.

With a view to the million dollar salvage and lost transit fees, the Suez Canal Authority had demanded compensation and the ship was first arrested and then officially confiscated.

Ever Given: Maritime law expert hardly sees any starting point for compensation for freight customers

At the same time, Jessen dampened possible hopes of freight customers for financial compensation. Usually, cargo owners insured their cargo with insurance policies. However, because of the recent sharp rise in freight rates, many companies have recently waived this, said Jessen. With the blockade of the Suez Canal and the subsequent establishment of the Ever Given, however, the "GAU" had occurred for many.

And even if the shipping companies had insured their freight, the prospect of compensation would be slim, the lawyer believes.

He considers claims for damages by the cargo owners against Egypt or the canal authorities to be "hopeless." Possible claims for damages against the shipping company are also "problematic because a number of possible reasons for exclusion of liability for carriers apply in maritime trade law." , for example through intent.

In view of this, he could only advise dealers “in principle against buying goods in East Asia and not insuring the transport to Europe.” The corresponding risk is “incalculable”.