The April 20 British Petroleum well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in an unprecedented release of oil that is damaging the environment and livelihoods of people along the Gulf Coast.
Not surprisingly, it also unleashed a flood of lawsuits that were filed almost immediately after the accident. Claims will continue to be filed against the companies involved in the accident for the foreseeable future. The nature of the operations that led up to the catastrophe and the different types of losses that may have resulted present some unique and challenging legal questions.
One might assume that all claims will fall under U.S. maritime law. However, legal precedent tells us that just because the incident involved a vessel on navigable waters it does not necessarily mean the activities that led to the accident were sufficiently rooted in maritime law. While the wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits will almost certainly be governed by laws that provide well-defined remedies for maritime workers, it is less clear whether claims for property damage and economic loss fall within the courts' admiralty jurisdiction or whether other federal or state laws will come into play.
This is significant because the size of recoverable damages may be more favorable under one set of laws while less so under others. For example, under maritime law an economic loss claim will generally be denied to a party who cannot prove that he has also suffered actual physical harm. On the other hand, purely economic damages without physical injury might be compensable under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 as well as certain state laws. These laws are sometimes mutually exclusive, while in some cases state or federal laws can be used to supplement remedies available under maritime law.
The magnitude of the fallout from the BP spill promises to set the stage for legal wrangling for years to come, and our judicial system will face the daunting task of trying to equitably resolve competing claims.