LINDENGRACHT

General information

Course/Position

Latest news

Court ruling: Zandink I was at fault in collision

The head-on collision on the IJsselmeer between the inland vessels 'Lindengracht' and 'Zandink I' was entirely the responsibility of the latter. The skipper of the 'Zandink I' ignored a passing agreement made shortly before the collision, according to a Rotterdam court ruling. The damages were more than €600,000. The ships were sailing towards each other on March 1, 2023, on the IJsselmeer. The 'Lindengracht' had just left the Houtrib Lock, to which the 'Zandink 1' was heading. The skippers discussed how they would pass each other via radio. This did not prevent the ships from colliding on their port sides. Because both parties blamed the other for the collision, a lawsuit was filed by the Cement Tankvaart (RCT) from Raamsdonksveer owner of the 'Lindengracht', and sought nearly €604,000 in damages, plus €26,500 for costs incurred to assess the damage and liability, and almost €5,000 in extrajudicial collection costs. Eeltink Zandwinning, Handel en Transport in Nijkerk, as the owner of the 'Zandik I', in turn, demanded that RCT be held liable, and additionally, €130,000 in compensation plus the costs for six weeks' lost time. All parties agreed that a passing agreement was made, which could not have been misunderstood. And everyone also believed that this agreement was central to determining who was at fault. Specifically, it concerned the following: "The 'Lindengracht' and 'Zandink I' were to pass each other port-to-port. To this end, the 'Zandink I' was to sail in front of the Lindengracht and towards its starboard side of the fairway. The 'Lindengracht', in turn, was to sail slightly more towards its starboard side." However, both RCT and Eeltink claimed that the other failed to comply with this passing agreement. Both parties have also provided evidence to support this claim. Remarkably, the Tresco footage of both vessels also supports the claims of both parties. This data therefore did not provide a conclusive answer. However, the judge considered the camera footage of the 'Lindengracht' to be conclusive. These recordings were played during the hearing, and both RCT and Eeltink presented their own perspectives on the matter. The images showed three things, in short, according to the ruling: "That the 'Lindengracht' was sailing on the starboard side of the fairway, that the 'Zandink I' had passed in front of it, and+ then suddenly veered to port." The judge ruled: the 'Lindengracht' was not at fault for the collision, and the 'Zandink I' was therefore the only one at fault. Eeltink's claims were therefore dismissed. As a result of this ruling, RCT was entitled to almost €604,000 in damages. More than two-thirds of this amount concerns repair costs. Lost time amounted to €94,000, combating the oil pollution that also occurred cost over €76,000, and the company spent €15,000 on installing and removing a compressor. Eeltink disputed over €6,100 in repair costs. The company also argued that RCT could not be held responsible for any delays, as the 'Lindengracht's cancellation could have been compensated for with other vessels in the fleet. However, the judge dismissed all these objections and awarded the full damages requested. This also applied to the other compensation claims and the legal costs of nearly €2,000. Reports with photos: https://binnenvaartkrant.nl/schepen-in-problemen-na-aanvaring-bij-lelystad https://flevopost.nl/lelystad/Aanvaring-tussen-tanker-en-cargo-binnenvaartschip-op-het-IJsselmeer-bij-Lelystad-28275586.html