NORWAY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Kristian Lindhartsen, Lilly Kathrin Relling and Tobias Kilde, Kvale Advokatfirma DA
Assessing Shipbroker Negligence: An Analysis of a New Ruling From the Norwegian Frostating Court of Appeal There is a scarcity of case law that specifically addresses the liability of shipbrokers for neg - ligence in their brokerage activities. This is in in contrast to other brokerage sectors, such as insurance and real estate, where the higher courts in Norway have provided several guid - ing rulings. However, these precedents are not entirely applicable to the shipping industry due to the distinct and fundamental characteristics thereof, and to the unique nature of each broker - age situation. Norwegian law does not codify the liability within the broker-client contractual relationship. Instead, any assessment of liability in this con - text is subject to a general test of tort, which is comprised of three standard requirements: the grounds for liability (which could be based on law, contract or non-statutory negligence), the presence of economic loss and the establish - ment of factual and legal causation. In Norway, there is an expectation that profes - sionals such as lawyers, accountants and bro - kers will adhere to a high standard of care. These individuals are held responsible for financial losses that arise from their negligence or failure to provide competent advice. This responsibility is based on a stringent, unwritten standard of care that also, in some situations, surpasses any specific contractual obligations. These profes - sionals have an inherent duty to act with care, which extends beyond the agreed terms of ser - vice. A breach of this duty can result in liability for any financial harm caused. It is common practice for these professionals to maintain insurance to cover such potential losses. In general, this type of liability has come
to be considered as a separate branch under the theme of negligence, with its own name: “pro - fessional liability” ( profesjonsansvaret ). Several well-known Supreme Court of Norway judge - ments form the basis for the assessment of this professional liability. When assessing a professional’s prudency to determine whether negligence has taken place, the Supreme Court of Norway has established that one must look to any relevant standards or code of conduct established for the relevant profession. The evaluation of a broker’s negli - gence should therefore take into account the established standards of practice set by The Norwegian Shipbrokers’ Association. These standards were notably referenced in a recent ruling by the Frostating Court of Appeal (case number LF-2023-72628-1), which provides valu - able insight into the interpretation of a shipbro - ker’s duty of care. While rulings from the Court of Appeal do not carry the same legal binding force as those from the Norwegian Supreme Court, they are none - theless significant. The legal system in Norway places a strong emphasis on the predictability and consistency of legal interpretations, and thus the Court of Appeal’s decision is likely to exert influence and serve as a reference point in future cases of a similar nature. The dispute at the heart of the matter The case in question involved Stormfuglen Hold - ing AS, a company owned by two sisters who were approaching retirement and had no heirs to continue their business. They were intent on selling their fishing vessel, MS Stormfuglen, and sought to do so privately to avoid the spotlight of public attention. To facilitate this private sale, they engaged the services of Atlantic Marine AS (AM), a brokerage firm.
436 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook