Recently, Haikou Maritime Court has applied the principle of high degree of probability to properly try and conclude a dispute over liability for damage to marine aquaculture during a typhoon attack.

At around 9 o’clock on 22 June 2015, the pontoon “Zi You Hai Yi Zhan XX” owned by the defendant, a leisure fishing company in Sanya, was taking shelter in Nanshan waters from Typhoon Kujira. Not anchored in reasonable waters and without sufficient measures against the wind, it dragged anchor and came into contact with the plaintiff’s aquaculture rafts. As a result, the female tiger groupers and female brown-spotted groupers in two net cages all escaped, and aquaculture equipment including a set of rafts and four net cages suffered damage. The financial loss incurred amounted to CNY 1.46 million. After multiple failed negotiations with the defendant for compensation, the plaintiff brought an action before Sanya Division of Haikou Maritime Court, requesting the defendant to compensate a sum of CNY 250,000 for damage to the rafts, net cages, ropes and anchors, and a sum of CNY 1.21 million for the loss of the female tiger groupers and female brown-spotted groupers.

Based on the fact that no vessels other than the defendant’s one was berthing at the accident waters at that time, and on the investigation findings of Sanya Maritime Safety Administration about the pontoon’s paint left at the point of contact with the aquaculture rafts, there was no denying that the defendant’s pontoon had collided with the plaintiff’s rafts. However, it was most tricky to ascertain the loss suffered by the plaintiff. Compared to collisions on land, in a marine aquaculture raft contact accident and other marine accidents, it was more difficult for the injured party to gather, fix and maintain evidence under the impact of currents, waves and other factors, especially during a typhoon attack. This was very disadvantage to the injured party’s evidence production. If the plaintiff’s claims were casually dismissed based on insufficient evidence of loss, the disputes between the litigants would not have been resolved fundamentally even if the judgment was legal; and the plaintiff would have to bear the loss solely even when facts of tort by the defendant had been established.

The defendant only gave verbal defence against the damage to the plaintiff’s aquaculture rafts but did not provide reliable evidence, while the plaintiff produced evidence that was apparently stronger. In order to ascertain the extent of compensation, judges of Sanya Division of Haikou Maritime Court took pains to do investigation and gather evidence. They visited the Maritime Safety Administration and fisheries authorities in Sanya to view videos, photos and other information and to interview the staff about the circumstances. This further proved that the weather in the accident waters was extreme and wind waves were strong on the day of the accident. The judges also visited the supplier of the plaintiff’s fishes, an aquatic products company in Hainan, to learn about the purchase time, quantity and prices of the plaintiff’s female fishes. Such information was consistent with the documents provided by the plaintiff, and the invoices for the female fishes were proved to be true. In addition, the judges also investigated into the farming conditions, relevant industrial standards and farming values of the female fishes in the surrounding areas.

The judges of the collegial bench considered the evidence produced by the plaintiff and that gathered through investigation, took into account the typhoon weather, sea condition and waves at the time of the accident, and viewed a large number of photos and videos of the accident scene showing damage to the net cages, ropes and fishing nets. Based on general life experience and logic, by applying the principle of high degree of probability, the judges confirmed that the plaintiff’s female fishes in the two net cages had escaped and were lost. Based on the purchase invoices for the female fishes, aquaculture records and other information provided by the plaintiff, the judges supported the plaintiff’s claim of loss in the sum of CNY 1.2 million. Accordingly, Haikou Maritime Court ordered the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the loss of the female fishes in the sum of CNY 1.2 million, and for the damage to the net cages and other equipment in the sum of CNY 150,000, totalling CNY 1,215,000. The plaintiff’s other claims were dismissed.

The defendant disagreed with the first-instance judgment and appealed to the Higher People’s Court of Hainan Province. After a second-instance trial, the Higher People’s Court of Hainan Province found that the first-instance judgment was based on clear findings of fact and correct application of law, and further recognized its underlying idea and values. The court thus legally dismissed the appeal and affirmed the first-instance judgment. After the judgment took effect, the plaintiff applied to Haikou Maritime Court for enforcement. The defendant soon fulfilled its obligations, and the dispute was properly resolved.