SINGAPORE POLYTECHNIC

SINGAPORE MARITIME ACADEMY

DIPLOMA IN MARITIME TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT

LAW OF MARITIME CARRIAGE OF GOODS AND INSURANCE (MA0099)

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE COLLISION OF THE DRILLSHIP ENIWETOK WITH THE SENTOSA CABLEWAY ON 29 JANUARY 1983

GROUP MEMBERS PARTICULARS NAME
1. SIM QING YI 2. AIMAN 3. WILLIS FOO

ADMIN NUMBER
P0961103

CLASS
DMTM 2A/22

Abstract This is an accident case occurred on 29 January 1983 at about 6pm where a Drill Ship Eniwetok collided with overhead cableway between the main island of Singapore and the island of Sentosa. the then Second Permanent Secretary of Defence. And also a total of thirteen other people stranded in four other cabins. 222 exhibits were admitted into evidence and 2076 pages of notes of evidence were recorded. killing seven people. A total of 85 witnesses were heard. As a result of the collision. The Person in charge of this Inquiry was then Senior State Counsel Sivakant Tiwari with assistance of two Queen¶s Counsel. . two of the cable car plunged into the sea. dated 11 February 1983. Mr Richard Stone and Michael Beloff. This appointment of the commission under the Inquiry Commissions Act (Chapter 48) was gazetted in the Republic of Singapore Government Gazette No. A Commission of Inquiry was appointed by the President of the Republic of Singapore on 5 February 1983. 436. This Commission sat in the High Court for 55 days from 23 May 1983 to 12 August 1983. The Rescue Operation was directed by then Colonel (Now Prime Minister) Lee Hsien Loong. An emergency rescue operation involving the Singapore Police Force and all three services of the Singapore Armed Forces was set up at the PSA Tower under control by Mr Philip Yeo. Chief of Staff (General Staff).

Individual Analysis Of The Report 8. Factors that may create the Collision of the Eniwetok with the Cableway 4. Group Analysis Of The Report 7.TABLE OF CONTENT 1. The Conclusion of the Commission Report 5. The Law of Negligence 6. The Collision of Eniwetok with the Sentosa Cableway 3. References PAGE 2 4-5 6 7-8 9 10 11-14 15 . Abstract 2.

Police sealed off the area around the World Trade Centre as rescue vehicles and ambulances were moved in. 1983 SEVEN people died last night when two Sentosa cable cars plunged into the sea after the ropeway had been struck by the derrick of an oil drilling vessel. Second Permanent Secretary (Defence). Its tower snagged the cable and the two cars were dislodged and flung into the water. The seven known dead included two out of seven of a Sikh family which had gone to Sentosa for the day. Some witnesses said three or more of the people in them were thrown out as the cars hurtled 55 m into the water. four tugs put lines aboard and worked to and fro to keep the drillship Eniwetok steady in the water. the major fear was that the stillentangled drillship tower could break the ropeway. the tension might snap the cable. said he looked up from his boat after hearing a loud noise. Several bodies fell close to Jardin Steps and a two-year-old boy was rescued alive from the water. Mr Mohamed Noor Nani. He grabbed a loudhailer and shouted "Go stun! Go stun!" (Go astern) but the drillship kept moving. An emergency operations centre was set up in PSA Tower under the control of Mr Philip Yeo. Apart from the helicopters. two on each side of the water. A team of army frogmen rushed to the scene and combed the water for bodies. A Singapore Fire Service spokesman said: "Almost anything we try will be risky. Shortly afterwards. at first he was blown off but on the second attempt he got onto the roof of the car and freed the two passengers. rescuers feared that as the drillship rose with the tide.The Collision of the Eniwetok with the Sentosa Cableway Seven die as two cable cars plunge into sea The Sunday Times. Police Task Force members were called out to control big crowds which gathered at the terminal as news of the tragedy spread. pulling it out of place. The other four had not been accounted for. Jan 30. a two-year-old boy. In a bid to prevent the drillship from moving. As the operation to reach the stranded cars continued. floating cranes were being moved into position in case they were needed to reach the stranded cars. was critically ill in hospital. He was in critical condition with head injuries.The disaster happened shortly after 6 pm. eye witnesses said the vessel's gantry tower snagged one of the two cables. A PSA boatman." The problem was worsened by a combination of the strong current and the rising tide ± high tide was at 11 pm. The Eniwetok had been converted from a bulk carrier in Keppel Shipyard and was commissioned only six weeks ago. A third. A PSA tug began towing the drillship away from Keppel Wharf. The helicopter lowered a winchman onto the car's roof. And early today two passengers were rescued from one of the stranded cars in a daring helicopter operation. . With the advent of the high tide at 11 pm. Last night rescue services were engaged in an operation to save another six people stranded in four other cable cars which stopped when the accident happened.

there were several cases of people being stranded when cable cars broke down. is run by Singapore Cable Cars and jointly owned by the Sentosa Development Corporation and the PSA. and a Caucasian woman. and a 60-year-old American visitor. the dead were Mr Fred Kunimoto. . But in 1977. a Chinese woman aged about 30. an American businessman living in Singapore. which cost $12 million. The system. an Australian man aged about 35. The accident is the first involving death or injury since the cable car system opened in February 1974. The Commission made recommendations for appropriate safety measures to be taken to prevent a similar occurrence in the future. The Commission conducted the Inquiry in public for 55 days from 23 May to 12 August 1983 and submitted its report on 30 December 1983. A Commission of Inquiry was appointed by the President of the Republic of Singapore on 5 February 1983 into the accident.As well as the two Sikhs.

. the lead counsel said that ³Ever though there was an introduction of height restriction placed on Keppel Harbour in 1973 with referenced in accordance with the International Practice´. It was noted that the tower of the Drill-ship Eniwetok struck the cableway while she was being unberthed from adjacent Oil Wharf in a tide flowing strongly towards the cableway with assistance of tugs at the forward and after end of the vessel. this accident wouldn¶t have been occurred if the below factors had not been coincided on that day such as: 1. If the emphasis of the height of the ship and the cableway is highlighted by the Captain Joki and the Pilot Baptista. 6. 4. If it was some other tug at the after end of Eniwetok instead of Tug Valiant (V7). If anyone on board had looked up and warned against the collision before it took place. If the report of the tripped of the towering hook mechanism had been done by TugMaster Koruthu after an earlier incident. If the second tripping of the towering hook mechanism hadn¶t occurred. The vessel was also under command and control of a Master and Pilot whom both didn¶t knew the actual height of the tower of the ship which in fact did not realise that it is taller than the cableway. . If the scheduled arrangement of the departure of Eniwetok by Keppel Shipyard was not on an ebb tide..Factors that may create the Collision of the Drill-ship with the Cableway on 29 January 1983 In the report of the commission of inquiry. 3. 5. When the towline of Tug Valiant V7 accidentally slipped. 2. the means of towing Eniwetok stern first away from Wharf and cableway had lost its support which enforced the effect of tidal stream to propelled the Vessel towards the cableway with the main engine had already been put ahead.

 To acceptance of the Master¶s offer to have anchors on standby. Captain Pekka Erkki Joki and The Pilot.  To order the proper manoeuvres to restrain the vessel from moving towards the cableway after the slipping of the towline...  To recommend to the Master to delay the unberthing until the change of tidal stream.The Conclusion of the Commission Report The Lead Counsels had conclude that the main dominant cause of this accident was the Negligence of both Master of the Vessel (Captain Joki) and Pilot of Port of Singapore Authority (Adrian Cajetan Baptista) The Master.  Ascertain the actual height of the ship and of the cableway. Adrian Cajetan Bapista was the main personnel had caused this accident as they had been grossly negligence on their duties such as a.  Recognise the possibility of collision in the event of error or accident. b.  Briefing on the special features of his ship to Pilot Baptista  Briefing to Chief Officer Mahon on the proposed manoeuvre and stressing on the critical importance of the actions of the after tug.. Dereliction of the Chief Officer duties by Robert Thomas Mahon:  Not ensuring that Keppel Harbour scale chart was onboard at Eniwetok  Alert the Master the risk of a collision between the Ship and of the Cableway  Remain at the his station until the unberthing manoeuvre was completed  Maintaining a Proper lookout throughout the unberthing  No Vigilance on the helideck when the towline had slipped which increased the danger of collision . c. Captain Joki had failed to exercise his full authority as a Master and also due care and skill to comply with ordinary practices of seamen by:  Ensuring that a properly coordinated unberthing manoeuvre was planned and executed by Pilot Baptista..  Familiarise himself with the unberthing situation of the vessel and to inform himself and others about the details relevant to safe navigation of the ship such as recognising the possibility of collision with the cableway in the event of accident or error while manoeuvring the ship in close proximity to the cableway.  Having a proper maintained lookup.  Taking over control of the ship in sufficient time and take whatever steps necessary to avoid collision including countermanding of the pilot¶s orders. Pilot Baptista had failed to exercise due care and diligence in execution of his pilotage duties while having conduct of the vessel by failing:  To familiarise the himself sufficiently with the details of the vessel and the unberthing situation of the vessel  To ascertain the actual height of the vessel.

Prohibit Vessels that had a height exceeding the promulgated clearance under the cableway iii. Port of Singapore Authority  Failure to take all necessary steps to protect the safety of the cableway such as i. The Owners/ Managing Agents ± Kepdrill International Incorporated SA/ Kapal Management Private Limited  Failure to provide the necessary information & equipment which ensure the safe operation and navigation of the ship such as Charts  Failure to ensure the existence of a proper and fully coordinated system of marine management of the ship e.d. Instructing its Pilots to obtain the heights of all Vessels that intended to navigate in Keppel Harbour ii. Introduce a system whereby all tall structured vessels is to be declared to the Port Operation Centre when piloting into or out of Keppel Harbour  Failure to maintain of Tug Valiant (V7) in a fit and safe condition to render towage services i. Keppel Shipyard Limited for its breaches of duty of care to its neighbour  Failure to take all necessary steps to protect the safety of the cableway . Implementation of a system whereby all incidents such as involuntary tripping of towing hook mechanism were be reported f. Adequately inspect and maintain the towing hook ii.

where a woman succeeded in establishing a manufacturer of ginger beer owed her a duty of care. "Negligence" is not the same as "carelessness". What is Contributory Negligence? Contributory negligence in common-law jurisdictions is defense to a claim based on negligence. This cited reference is a very narrow application of contributory negligence and only applies to cases of implied warranty. It can be generally defined as conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm. the duty concept has expanded into a coherent judicial test. yet choose to put the issue aside because they underestimated the importance. based on the circumstances of the case. throughout the 20th century. The Breaches of Duty of Care The Legal Obligation of Duty of Care is to take reasonable care to avoid causing damages. where it had been negligently produced. a pedestrian crosses a road negligently and is hit by a driver who was driving negligently. If such a duty is found to be breached. In English tort law. yet still fall below the level of competence expected of them. It applies to cases where a plaintiff. Contributory negligence is often regarded as unfair because under the doctrine a victim who is at fault to any degree. It is the opposite of "diligence". They could also be aware of the issues. through his own negligence. Its origins can be found in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson. . contributed to the harm he suffered. to ensure that they do not suffer any unreasonable harm or loss. Following this. to compensate the victim for any losses they incur. the court will. For example. because someone might be exercising as much care as they are capable of. The idea of individuals owing strangers a duty of care ± where beforehand such duties were only found from contractual arrangements ± developed at common law. which must be satisfied in order to claim in negligence.The Law of Negligence What is Negligence? Negligence is a type of tort (also known as a civil wrong). Claimant has. an individual may be owed a duty of care by another. reduce the damages awarded to the claimant according to the claimant¶s level of culpability. A finding of contributory negligence is not a complete defence for a defendant. including only 1% at fault may be denied compensation entirely. an action in tort. a legal liability is imposed upon the duty-owner.

Group Analysis .

1983´. but also those around its vicinity. property and environment is the prime responsibility of the Master or Captain. The safety of life. it is proven that due to the failure of the captain failure to maintain the safety of property. Adrian Cajetan Baptista have put forth an act of negligence. With the possibility of the cableway snapping. This also accounts for the safe navigation of the vessel. not only for the people on board the cable cars. ³Seven die as two cable cars plunge into sea. due to an act of negligence." said a Singapore Fire Service spokesman. it was claimed that ³the major fear was that the still-entangled drillship tower could break the ropeway´. The Sunday Times. . In Eniwetok¶s case. The damage caused by Eniwetok to the cableway would mean that the captain failed to maintain the safety of property. Captain Pekka Erkki Joki. In the article. leading them to the breach of their respective duties.Individual Analysis Name: Aiman Class: DMTM 2A/22 I can agree that both Captain Pekka Erkki Joki and The Pilot. the number of casualties could be potentially higher. Jan 30. failed to produce the safety standards required in his prime responsibility. he has also failed to maintain the safety of life and environment. ³Almost anything we try will be risky. Hence.

Captain Pekka Errki Joki & the Pilot. Based on the statements by the involving parties. the evidences and the witness¶s statement. The Pilot assumes that the Master would provide all the necessary information of the Ship details to him for its unberthing situation such as the height of the ship.Individual Analysis Name: Sim Qing Yi Class: DMTM 2A/22 Admin No: P0961103 I totally agree with the Lead Counsels Conclusion as it was clearly the negligence of the Master of Eniwetok (Captain Pekka Erkki Joki) & the Pilot (Adrian Cajetan Baptista) and other relevant Organisations. Inform the Port Operation Centre that the Ship was a tall drillship with special characteristics which will increase the risk to the cableway. The Negligence of the Master of Eniwetok. Ensure that the Master of the ship fully aware of the unusual characteristic of the ship Failure to ensure that its Dock-master are aware of the height of all tall ships coming into Keppel Shipyard Warning to the Operators of the cableway the risk created by the presence in close proximity to the highest point of the ship to the cableway and requesting them to take all passengers to be taken off the cableway while such ship was being manoeuvred. the Pilot should have tried to familiarise himself with Ship and the Harbour area before meeting the Master & discuss the unberthing plan. this is my view points that make me agree to this Conclusion. . Adrian Cajetan Baptista and Chief Officer Robert Thomas Mahon   Lack of knowledge of the exact details of the ship when taking over from Keppel Shipyard by the Master Master neglect the unberthing situation as he was busy with the preparation for the departure and assume that the Pilot would be experienced enough to lead the Ship toward sea safety The Pilot never voice out to the Port Operation Centre or the Master that He was inexperienced in handling the drillship and also unberthed any ship from the Keppel Oil Wharf When the Ship was delayed for the departure. There was no discussion of height of the ship as the Pilot felt that was inapplicable as the Ship is moving towards western working anchorage instead towards to the Cableway. Ignorance of the Two Critical Heights of the ship and the cableway      The Breaches of the duties of care to its neighbour by Marine Manager Chiam Toon Thong of Keppel Shipyard:      Failure to check the height of the cableway before revamping the Eniwetok.

Making sure that all equipment are not faulty before usage The Breaches of duties of care by Captain Chak Kwok Wai of Kepdrill International Incorporated SA/ Kapal Management Private Limited as he was the Officer directly response for acting behalf of Kapal Management Pte Ltd:    Failure to provide the necessary adequate charts for the Master and/or for the use of the ship. Providing the full and clear information about the height of the ship.The Breaches of the duties of care by Captain Goh Choo Keng/ Superintendent Nova Elliotte Lewis/ Deputy Superintendent Lawrence Seow Hood Teck and Tug-Master Jaccob Koruthu of Port of Singapore Authority:      Failure to maintain the tug boat in a condition fit manner. Failure to ensure the existence of a proper and fully coordinated of marine management onboard the ship . as unusual feature relevant to its safe navigation to the Master. prior to the departure of the ship. Getting the correct details of the Vessels that are manoeuvring within the Keppel Harbour though either from the Master of the Vessels or its Pilots Failure to implement a system to record all incidents that are reported. Prohibit Vessels that exceeding the height of the cableway. which appropriate measures taken to prevent a recurrence.

Individual Analysis Name: Willis Foo Class: DMTM 2A/21 Admin No: .

asia1.html http://en.wikipedia. Published on 30 January 1983 3.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence http://en.sg/dream/life/headline/lifh10. The Collision of the Eniwetok into the Sentosa Cableway http://ourstory.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence http://en.com. The Law Of Negligence http://en.REFERENCES AND SOURCES 1.org/wiki/Singapore_Cable_Car_disaster 2.wikipedia. Report of Commission of Inquiry into the Collision of the Drillship Eniwetok with the Sentosa Cableway on 29 January 1983.org/wiki/Duty_of_care_in_English_law .

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.