The Law of Lookouts

By Marilyn Raia

M
any have said the most addressed the need for a lookout in dock or to warn if the vessel’s speed
important of the navi- negative language: when approaching the dock is exces-
gation rules is Rule 5, sive. Nonetheless, the tug operator has
which requires every vessel to have Nothing in these Rules shall exon- a duty to post a lookout for the tug’s
a lookout: erate any vessel, or the owner, master own safety.
or crew thereof from the consequences Certain circumstances may dictate
Every vessel shall at all times of …any neglect to keep a proper the posting of more than one lookout
maintain a proper lookout by sight look-out…. on a vessel. Heavy weather, fog, dark-
and hearing as well as by all available ness, a crowded channel or the vessel’s
means appropriate in the prevailing The International Rules of the general arrangement may require a
circumstances and conditions so as to Road were amended in the 1970’s lookout on each side of the bow as
make a full appraisal of the situation and the obligation to have a lookout well as in the wheelhouse. Multiple
and the risk of collision. was stated in positive language, i.e. lookouts may also be required when a
“every vessel shall maintain a proper vessel passes under a bridge or a series
The navigation rules, and in par- lookout….” Moreover, the amended of bridges with a narrow clearance. In
ticular Rule 5, were designed specifi- version of the lookout rule imposed an such situation, the standard of prudent
cally to prevent vessel collisions and additional duty on the lookout, namely, seamanship likely will require various
allisions with stationary objects such “to use all available means appropriate crewmembers to be stationed around
as piers, bridges or obstructions to in the prevailing circumstances and the vessel observing the passage.
navigation. conditions.” The required “available
means” have been construed by the The Consequences
The Lookout’s Duties courts to sometimes include the use of Violating the Lookout Rule
A lookout is considered the eyes and of radar and/or binoculars. The failure to post a lookout and
ears of the vessel. As such, the lookout The Lookout’s Position use all available means to determine
must have good vision and hearing and if a risk of collision exists may lead
on the Vessel
be trained and experienced enough to to a presumption of fault under the
recognize what is being observed and While the navigation rules them- Pennsylvania rule, derived from an 1873
heard. The slightest negligence by the selves do not specify where the lookout US Supreme Court case, The Penn-
lookout can result in loss of the vessel should be stationed aboard the vessel, sylvania, 86 U.S. 125 (1873). Under
on which he is stationed as well as the industry custom and case law require that rule, when a vessel in a collision is
property and persons aboard. It can the lookout to be posted as far forward found to have violated a statutory rule
also result in the loss of other vessels, and as near the water as possible. designed to prevent collisions, such as
property and persons. However, the configuration of the the navigation rule requiring a lookout,
The lookout’s view should be unob- vessel and the surrounding conditions a presumption of fault is raised. The
structed. Smoke or fog impairing the may dictate otherwise. For example, a violator must then prove by clear and
lookout’s vision should be reported to lookout on a vessel with an upper and convincing evidence the violation did
the navigating officer. The lookout must lower wheelhouse may, under certain not and could not have played a role
know the significance of whistles, bells, conditions, have a better vantage point in the casualty. There must be a causal
lights and shapes under the prevailing from the upper wheelhouse. And, a connection between the violation and
conditions and be able to determine vessel that is backing or maneuvering the casualty.
whether a vessel he observes is mov- may be held negligent by not having a The failure to observe a properly lit
ing or not. The lookout must watch for lookout posted at the stern. A tug towing vessel or a marked hazard to naviga-
overhead obstructions such as power a barge or other vessel is not required tion resulting in a casualty is a clear
lines in addition to obstructions in the to have a lookout at the stern constantly violation of the lookout rule, resulting
water. The lookout must be able to watching the tow if the weather is fair, in a presumption of fault that would be
adequately and timely communicate the seas are calm and there is no reason difficult if not impossible to overcome.
what is observed to those persons to anticipate a perilous condition to In Yaeger v. the Alten, 167 F. Supp.
navigating the vessel but does not have develop. However, the failure to post 617 (D. Or. 1958), two fishing vessels
any obligation to speculate about the a lookout on a tug to watch a vessel collided in the Pacific Ocean west of
likelihood of a collision or how vessels under tow may be negligent under other Waldport, Oregon. The master of one
will move in relation to each other. circumstances. Moreover, depending of the vessels, the Breezy Bill, ordered
It has been said the law requires the on the configuration of the tug and tow, the running lights to be turned off, but
lookout to engage in “indefatigable negligence may be found when there left a 360º white arc light showing on
care and sleepless vigilance” because is no lookout on the towed vessel in the mast, 25 feet above the waterline.
the lookout is charged with knowledge addition to a lookout on the tug. He and the crewman then went below
of all that can be seen and heard. A tug assisting a ship to dock does to sleep. The other vessel, the Alten,
The International Rules of the Road not have a duty to post a lookout for was being navigated by auto pilot with
adopted by Congress in the 1950’s the ship to prevent it from hitting the a crewman who had only three months

12 Pacific Maritime • July 2009 • www.pacmar.com

experience at sea, acting as lookout. a lookout was present is irrelevant the casualty because a lookout on the
For fifteen minutes before the colli- to liability when the presence of a Fort Worth could not have anticipated
sion, the crewman observed the mast lookout would not have prevented the the Keiyoh Maru would not respect the
light on the Breezy Bill but believed casualty. In Texas Eastern Transmis- restricted areas.
it to be the mast light for the Yaquina sion Corp. v. Tug Captain Dann, 898 The presumption of fault resulting
lighthouse which was located twenty F. Supp. 198 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) a barge from the failure to post a lookout may
miles away from the point of collision. under tow struck an exposed under- also be rebutted when the vessel with
The court found both vessels at fault, water gas pipeline. The court held the no lookout was the privileged vessel
the Alten’s fault being premised on the tug’s failure to post a lookout was not and maintained her course and speed as
lookout’s having mistaken a steady 360º negligence because a lookout could required under the navigation rules.
white arc mast light for the lighthouse’s not have seen the exposed underwater The importance of a lookout aboard
flashing mast light. pipeline at night. a vessel in navigation cannot be over-
Failure to have a lookout can also In Trinidad Corporation v. S.S. stated. The lookout, or multiple look-
serve as the basis for a vessel owner’s Keiyoh Maru, 845 F.2d 818 (9th outs if the situation requires, must be
liability to a crewmember for personal Cir. 1988), two vessels collided just positioned on the vessel to maximize
injuries proximately caused by such outside the port of Los Angeles. The vision and hearing. The lookout must
Keiyoh Maru crossed into a restricted be able to discern the significance of
violation.
pilot boarding area and struck the what is heard and observed and report
Liability for Violation of the bow of the Fort Worth just inside the it to the navigating officer. An incom-
Lookout Rule May Be Avoided restricted area. The Fort Worth was petent, inadequate or absent lookout
not using radar or a lookout to track is a violation of the navigation rules
The absence or insufficiency of a the movements of other vessels in the and raises a rebuttable presumption
lookout does not always lead to the area and consequently was unable to of fault.
imposition of liability. The presump- avoid the Keiyoh Maru. The court of
tion of fault can be rebutted. A court appeals affirmed the district court’s Marilyn Raia is of counsel in the San
will consider the circumstances and ruling that although the Fort Worth had Francisco office of Bullivant Houser
the customary practice of seamen in violated the rule requiring a lookout, Bailey PC where she practices maritime
making such determination. Whether such violation did not play a role in and transportation law.

Coming in August
Fast Ferries!
As roads become more congested and fuel prices unpredictable, fast ferries continue
to gain popularity. The fast ferry construction market continues strong with new
developments in hull design, propulsion and ride controls. 
It remains a vibrant segment of the maritime industry, and the West Coast continues to lead
the way in construction and implementation of fast passenger waterborne transportation.
In August we will take a look at the design, construction and application of fast ferries
around the country with a specific focus on West Coast operations.
If you design, build or provide equipment and services to the fast ferry market, this is the
ideal editorial environment to place an advertisement to reach your target market.
Space deadline for the August 
Southern Shipyards issue is July 20th with a materials
deadline of July 24th.
Jim Shaw’s annual survey of Gulf Coast Yards; their projects for West Coast Customers
and interesting projects for other customers form around the world. To reserve advertising space
call Mike Morris at 206-284-8285
If you operate a Gulf Coast yard or are a supplier in the shipbuilding market this is your or send your reservation via email to
opportunity to promote your capabilities to the West Coast maritime market. [email protected]

November 17-18th, 2009

www.pacmar.com • July 2009 • Pacific Maritime 13