Helicopter crashes into offshore drilling rig-- What law prevails: Jones Act, General Maritime, or other?
On Monday Reuters reported that a Ukranian helicopter operating in the Black Sea crashed into an offshore drilling platform killing all 20 people aboard. The helicopter's rotor struck a steel fence rail on the rig during a landing attempt. The pilot lost control of the helicopter which then slammed into the rig and burst into flames. No one on the rig was injured.
Circumstances of the accident raise questions about what body of law has jurisdiction. Can injury or wrongful death claims be brought under the Jones Act or does General Maritime Law apply? Without more details, the answer isn't necessarily clear. Depending on the exact nature of the circumstances either may apply.
The fact that the workers were being transported to the rig suggests that they were maritime workers, and an aircraft which crashed into the sea would come under maritime jurisdiction. But the helicopter crashed into the rig and not the sea. Still, some cases have held that the crash of an aircraft engaged in a function traditionally performed by waterborne vessels, such as ferrying passengers from shore to an island or artificial island including offshore platforms, is within maritime jurisdiction.
Considering that they were working in the Black Sea, the workers may be foreign workers which means that US law such as the Jones Act would not normally apply. General Maritime Law does however apply because it is not exclusive to the US and/or US territorial waters-- its scope is global. However, if the rig is a movable rig, otherwise known as a Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU), and a US company is involved, then the workers may be covered as seamen under the Jones Act whether they were US workers or not. It is possible for foreign seamen to be covered under the Jones Act and people working on MODUs are seamen by definition.
If you have questions about a matter of maritime law, contact a maritime lawyer at
.
