Owners of MSC Elsa 3 ship approach Kerala High Court seeking to limit liability on maritime claims arising out of sinkage
CHENNAI : Elsa 3 Maritime Inc., Multi Container Management and MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co. have filed an admiralty suit before the Kerala High Court praying for limitation of liability for maritime claims arising from the losses caused due to the sinkage of MSC Elsa III.
MSC Elsa 3, a Liberian-flagged vessel, sank off the coast of Kerala on May 25, 2025, causing grave environmental, ecological and economic damages. Since then, a public interest litigation and multiple admiralty suits have been filed before the Kerala High Court by private persons and the government of Kerala.
Its sisters ships, namely M.V. MSC Polo II, MSC Manasa F and MV MSC Akiteta II were ordered to be arrested in these cases to satisfy the claims of the plaintiffs.
The present suit was filed by the plaintiffs before the High Court under Part XA of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 which provides for limitation of liability of the ship owners. However, the Registry noted a defect in the suit. The suit, marked with defect, was listed on Tuesday (August 5) before Justice Easwaran S. wherein the counsel for the plaintiffs submitted that the objection of the Registry is regarding description of defendant no. 8 in general terms.
In the plaint, the defendant No. 8 was described as “All persons claiming or being entitled to claim damages” to include all potential defendants who would have a maritime claim arising out of the sinking of the ship.
The senior counsel appearing for the plaintiffs submitted that it seeks to limit its liability as provided under Part XA of the Merchant Shipping Act, and as per the International Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims to which India is a signatory.
The counsel told the Court that the ship was a container ship and it was carrying around 643 containers. Therefore, there could be many consignees who might initiate action against the company, ultimately resulting in arrest of sister ships or depositing large sums as securities before the Court.
The counsel further submitted that the Act and the Convention not only provide for the limitation of liability but also for the setting up of a liability fund. The quantum of the limit is calculated based on the tonnage of the ship, which in this case, comes to around 14 million dollars.
The counsel urged that there was an urgency in this case since already seven parties have made claims and caused arrest of the ships of the company. Resultantly, there has been difficulty in securing insurance and freight.
The counsel further submitted that the freight would increase exponentially, which would lead to increase in the prices of goods. Thereupon, the Court inquired about the possibility of the liability fund not being enough to clear all the liabilities and the counsel replied that in such a case, the amount would be distributed on a pro rata basis.
The counsel informed the Court about the Model Rules prepared by the Bombay High Court that lays down the procedure for filing limitation suits such as the present one. The counsel submitted that according to the said Rules, at least one defendant must be named in the suit and the rest could be a general defendant. In the suit, defendants 1 to 7 were the persons who already filed claims against the plaintiffs and the defendant no. 8 is the general defendant so as to give public notice, it was submitted.
Thus, the plaintiff counsel submitted that the case may be numbered. After a detailed hearing on Wednesday, the Court passed an order overruling the two defects noted by the Registry and directed numbering of the suit. The case is next posted on August 21. The petition is moved by Advocates Pranoy K. Kottaram, Sivaraman P.L., Athul Babu, Sreenand Udayan.