EEMS WARRIOR

Allgemeine Informationen

Kurs/Position

Die neuesten Nachrichten

Captain, 1st and 2nd mate found responsible for allisions in 2024

The captain, the first and the second mate of the 'Eems Warrior' have been found responsible for the allisions with both the Botlek Bridge and the Spijkenisser Bridge on Dec 18, 2024, according the Disciplinary Board for Shipping. Due to various circumstances, including the fact that one of them was sent to the front in Ukraine, they got away with a fine or a reprimand. The ship was on its way to pick up a pontoon from Eemshaven in 's-Gravendeel. Before passing the piers at Hoek van Holland, the captain entered the wheelhouse to take over the watch from the first mate. He took over the watch again a little later because the captain had to go to the toilet. When passing the Botlek Bridge and the Spijkenisser Bridge, which were both closed, the bottom of the bridge was hit by the navigation mast of the 'Eems Warrior'. When this happened for the second time, the captain was back in the wheelhouse. The ILT inspector on duty filed a complaint against the captain and first mate for their involvement in the incidents. A complaint was filed against the second mate because he had drawn up the voyage plan. The third mate was accused of not having stated in the voyage plan that the bridges had to be open for a successful passage. The captain was accused of having approved this plan. According to the inspector, all three of them dropped stitches, including not knowing what the air draft of the 'Eems Warrior' was and not being aware of the clearance height of both bridges when closed. The three had nothing to say against the ILT inspector's view of the case. Almost all objections against them were therefore acknowledged by the Disciplinary Board for Shipping, with a few exceptions. For exampl it was up to the captain, who knew the shipping route, to inform the first mate about opening the bridges. It was not up to the mate to ask the captain in the situation where the latter had to go to the toilet. No measure has been imposed on the captain, because he has already paid a fine of over 600 euros proposed by the Public Prosecution Service. According to the ILT inspector, the Disciplinary Board did not need to demand another measure. The board itself had a different opinion on this, because the purpose of a case before the board is different from a criminal case: punishment versus quality control. However, no measure was imposed, mainly because the ILT inspector did not demand anything and because the captain ‘had been led to expect that the prosecution by the Disciplinary Board would not lead to the imposition of a measure.’ The first mate is given a fine of 200 euros, which was lower than the inspector demanded. This was partly due to the fact that he has returned home due to family circumstances and that he has no income. Due to the allisions with the bridges, his contract with the shipping company has not been extended. The second mate has failed in his responsibilities, the Disciplinary Board for Shipping judged. In his case, personal circumstances were plaiying a role in not giving him a fine. He is now a soldier at the Ukrainian front, he has a very low income and it is also plausible in his case that his contract has not been extended due to the allisions. That is why only he receives a reprimand.