Court throws fisho a lifeline in Darwin Harbour boat crash compo bid

A Darwin fisho’s long-running legal battle with the owner of a barge that allegedly smashed into his boat in Darwin Harbour in 2016 has been thrown a lifeline in the Darwin Local Court.

Dale Marshall, left, with mate Jaron Early, who was also on board during the crash. Picture: Patrina Malone

• Fisho sues barge company for PTSD caused by crash after last ditch criminal charge bid fails
• Fishos waiting for justice as Senate finds AMSA legislation botched
• Drowning in red tape: Boat crash investigations going nowhere
• Four fishermen rescued off Charles Point after boat sunk in collision

A DARWIN fisho’s long-running legal battle with the owner of a barge that allegedly smashed into his boat in Darwin Harbour in 2016 has been thrown a lifeline in Darwin Local Court.

Dale Marshall and his wife Bronwyn are suing Shorebarge Pty Ltd over the injuries Mr Marshall claims he sustained in the crash and the loss of an uninsured $46,853.40 diesel engine.

The proceedings had stalled after Shorebarge argued the Marshalls had missed the two-year statutory limitation.

But judge John Neill has ruled that deadline should be extended after criminal proceedings were withdrawn due to botched maritime safety legislation.

Mr Neill said Mr Marshall missed the two-year deadline but an extension was warranted as he “had an explanation”.

“This was that he personally had received frequent communications from Stephen Harris, the lead investigator for the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, and he understood from him and believed that upon the completion of the investigation, proceedings would be commenced against the other vessel and its owners,” he said.

MORE TOP STORIES

Youths smash up Palmerston cafe, library, terrifying onlookers

Oz Day sausage scuffle sparked alleged attempted murder: Court

Plan for new $22m retail precinct with tavern

A senate committee conducting an inquiry into AMSA’s performance would later excoriate the statutory body as utterly incapable of regulating Australian waters.

“(Mr Marshall) might be regarded as naive or at least unwise in pinning his expectations on the outcome of the investigation which after all was not being conducted with his interests in mind,” Mr Neill said.

“With the clarity of hindsight, it would have been better for him to have consulted his own legal advisers much earlier, although even if he had done so, it is by no means certain that the legal advisers would have been aware of or would have become aware in time of the two-year limitation period.

“I am satisfied however that in proceeding in this fashion, (Mr Marshall’s) delay was neither intentional nor contumelious.”

Shorebarge has denied its vessel was involved in the crash but settled a separate claim by the Marshalls’ insurer.

AMAZING NT News subscription offer: Only $1 for first 28 days

In granting the application, Mr Neill ruled the Marshalls would suffer hardship if the deadline was not extended through losing their ability to seek compensation while Shorebarge would not suffer prejudice or lose the opportunity for a fair hearing.