ABSTRACT
The phenomenon of has run parallel with the hard-fought campaigns in which the Courts have struggled to define criminal liability for negligence, that is, guilt according to the consequences, not according to intent. The obvious starting point in understanding the phenomenon therefore, must be to analyse how negligence evolved in maritime litigation. The critical issue arose of the determination of two questions in negligence:
Who is at fault?
Who is entitled to compensation for that fault?
This chapter therefore analyses the meaning of criminal negligence, applying it to a number of case studies, which enables conclusions to be drawn on the gulf between the fairness of the prosecution of a seafarer and the realities in Port State jurisdictions. From this point the understanding of the phenomenon can be tested with an exercise, taken from the facts of a case which illustrates many of the issues in risk management which can lead to disaster and, indeed, show how a case of criminal negligence for manslaughter can be constructed.
