Civil vs. Criminal Law at Sea: Why Litigation Is the Crew’s Lifeline

When Harm at Sea Is Ignored, Law Becomes the Only Lever That Moves Power

In the maritime world, the line between justice and silence is often razor-thin. Crew members are encouraged to report issues through the proper channels , captain, DPA, management, flag state , yet time and again those doors quietly close, emails go unanswered, reports disappear, and careers stall, while the behaviour that caused harm continues unchecked.

This is where law matters most , not as an abstract concept, but as a practical instrument for accountability when every other mechanism fails.

This article examines a point that remains widely misunderstood at sea: the difference between criminal law and civil law , and why civil litigation is often the crew’s only real lifeline.

Criminal Law vs. Civil Law: The Distinction That Changes Everything

Many crew members believe that if an incident is not criminally prosecuted, there is no legal path forward , a belief that is both incorrect and quietly damaging.

Criminal law is enforced by the state. It exists to punish wrongdoing through imprisonment or fines and carries an exceptionally high burden of proof. When police or prosecutors decline to pursue charges, the matter often ends there, regardless of the harm experienced.

Civil law operates differently, and in maritime cases that difference is decisive.

Civil law exists to provide remedy to the injured party. It allows individuals to pursue accountability even when criminal charges are never filed, never sustained, or never attempted , a reality that defines much of the maritime landscape.

A crew member may be told there is no criminal case to pursue and still hold a valid civil claim for assault, negligence, unsafe working conditions, retaliation, or failure to provide a reasonably safe workplace.

“Just because there is no criminal prosecution does not mean there is no legal remedy.”

This distinction is the foundation of maritime civil litigation , and the reason it has driven more structural change in the industry than internal reporting systems ever have.

Why Employers , Not Just Individuals , Are Central to Maritime Cases

In criminal proceedings, responsibility is individual. In civil maritime cases, responsibility expands.

When harm occurs on board, the employer becomes central. If a company knew , or reasonably should have known , that conditions were unsafe, that reporting systems were ineffective, or that misconduct was being concealed, liability follows as a matter of law.

Civil litigation allows scrutiny of systemic failures, including:

• Failure to act on reports

• Lack of enforcement of safety policies

• Retaliation against crew who speak up

• Use of NDAs to suppress complaints

• Patterns of repeat behaviour enabled by silence

  
  

The legal question shifts from “Did something happen?” to “Who allowed it to continue?” , a shift that marks the true beginning of accountability.

Evidence: What Matters , and What Crew Already Have

Crew members often hesitate to speak with a lawyer because they believe they lack evidence. In practice, many already possess more than they realise.

Evidence may include emails reporting incidents, messages requesting help that went unanswered, records of anonymous complaints, medical reports, photographs of unsafe conditions, employment contracts, or documentation showing retaliation or termination.

Silence itself can be evidence.

Unanswered reports establish timelines. They demonstrate attempts to follow protocol. They expose organisational failure. In civil law, these details carry weight.

“Building the case is the lawyer’s job , not the crew member’s.”

The responsibility of the crew member is not to master maritime law, but to preserve what they can while they still can.

Statutes of Limitation: Time Still Matters

Legal rights are not indefinite, even when harm is ongoing.

Under U.S. maritime law, most civil claims must be brought within three years of the incident. Certain claims , including sex trafficking , allow longer periods, but delay always carries risk, and evidence erodes quietly.

Importantly, leaving the vessel or the country does not remove legal rights. Jurisdiction in maritime law is complex, but departure does not erase accountability.

Waiting, however, often does.

Flag States: Why Litigation Still Matters When Oversight Fails

Flag states are tasked with enforcing international standards. In practice, enforcement remains inconsistent and, in some cases, largely symbolic.

While crew members cannot easily pursue legal action against flag states directly, litigation against employers creates pressure that flag systems cannot ignore. Patterns emerge, records accumulate, and reputations follow.

Over time, repeated cases involving the same flags raise concerns at international levels , particularly within the IMO , where litigation data becomes leverage and leverage becomes reform.

Change rarely begins with goodwill. It begins with exposure.

Blacklisting, Retaliation, and the Misuse of Protection Laws

Retaliation protections exist to shield crew who report safety issues or wrongdoing. They do not exist to protect perpetrators.

A crew member who reports unsafe conditions should never be blacklisted. A company that refuses to rehire someone found , through internal investigation , to pose a risk to others is not retaliating; it is exercising its duty of care.

The distortion of these principles has allowed repeat offenders to circulate quietly through the industry, protected by silence and misapplied caution. Civil law remains one of the few mechanisms capable of interrupting that cycle.

Before Joining a Vessel: Legal Awareness as Self-Protection

Prevention begins before embarkation, not after harm occurs.

Crew members should ask who the legal employer is, what insurance coverage exists, which policies govern harassment, assault, and reporting, and how complaints are handled , in writing, not verbally.

These are not confrontational questions. They are professional ones, and the answers matter.

A vessel unwilling to address them has already revealed enough.

Why Litigation Drives Real Change

Internal processes fail quietly. Litigation does not.

Civil cases create records. Records create accountability. Accountability creates change.

For too long, the burden has fallen on crew to endure, adapt, or disappear. Law shifts that burden back where it belongs , onto those with power, resources, and responsibility.

“Real change starts with accountability.”

At sea, civil law is not a last resort.

It is often the only one.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

SUPPORTED BY

MOORE DIXON

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Global specialists in superyacht insurance, risk management and strategic support for owners, captains and the wider maritime sector.

🌐 mdbl.im

Criminal law punishes, civil law protects. At sea, that distinction can determine whether harm is buried or addressed.