{"id":6182,"date":"2026-07-14T19:48:16","date_gmt":"2026-07-14T11:48:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?p=6182"},"modified":"2026-07-14T19:48:16","modified_gmt":"2026-07-14T11:48:16","slug":"maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/","title":{"rendered":"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1. Summary and Facts:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em><u>Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v Pemunya-Pemunya Kapal atau Vesel Icon Sophia<\/u><\/em><\/strong> [2025] 9 MLJ 397 the dispute arose when an accident occurred during an anchor deployment operation involving the plaintiff\u2019s accommodation work barge, <em>Two Eastwind<\/em> and the defendant\u2019s anchor handling tug supply vessel, <em>Icon Sophia<\/em> at an offshore oilfield. The defendant had been engaged to assist in deploying eight anchors in a predetermined sequence to stabilize the barge under the supervision of the plaintiff\u2019s marine controller. However, the deployment sequence was altered during operation, and the work proceeded despite prevailing sea currents of approximately 1.5 to 2.0 knots.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On the second day of operations, the tug approached the barge to retrieve the final anchor, but due to the strong current, it was unable to maintain a proper approach. After securing the anchor, the tug had trouble maneuvering away and while attempting to pull off using maximum power, its aft section collided with the barge\u2019s hull, causing physical damage. As a result, plaintiff commenced an action in negligence against the defendant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">2. Legal Issues:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Whether <em>res ipsa loquitur<\/em> was applicable under the facts of this case;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether the court was bound to accept the defendant\u2019s expert\u2019s conclusion; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether the plaintiff had established its quantum of damages as claimed.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3. Court\u2019s Findings:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court held that the defendant was liable for the damages arising from the incident. However, notwithstanding the plaintiff\u2019s success on the issue of liability, the plaintiff was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings on the basis that ; &#8211;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Although, the doctrine of <em>Res Ipsa Loquitur<\/em> has been established and that the defendant failed to rebut the inference of negligence;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>However, the court find that the plaintiff has also failed to prove its claims as the evidence submitted was insufficient to support the quantum claimed; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Hence, the plaintiff was penalised in costs due to its unreasonable rejection of Calderbank settlement offers made by defendant and therefore was ordered to bear the costs of RM 80,000 as well as reimburse for the defendant\u2019s expert witness expenses while, the defendant were only ordered to pay RM 50,000 for the nominal damages on the liability.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">4. Practical Implications:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This decision marks a significant authority on the application of <em>res ipsa loquitur<\/em> and damages. Whereas:-<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The High Court clarified that the doctrine remains applicable even where explanatory evidence is later introduced by the defendant; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It also emphasise that expert evidence is not conclusive and must be grounded in facts; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It highlights the importance of strict proof of damages as failure to substantiate loss can drastically reduce recovery.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The case shows that parties in control of operations may be presumed negligence if an accident occurs, unless they can clearly rebut it with evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If you need more information on our legal updates, our Knowledge and Law News Division at <a href=\"mailto:lawnews@yhalaw.com.my\">lawnews@yhalaw.com.my<\/a> would be pleased to assist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates (Law Firm)<\/strong><br>Advocates &amp; Solicitors<br>No. 1, Jalan Riangria 6<br>Taman Desa Tiara, Off Jalan Klang Lama<br>58200 Kuala Lumpur<br>Tel: +603-7971 3191<br>Fax: +603-7972 9131<br>Email: <a href=\"mailto:enquiry@yhalaw.com.my\">enquiry@yhalaw.com.my<\/a><br>Website: <a href=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\">https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><small>\u00a92026. YEW HUOI, HOW &amp; ASSOCIATES. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. The contents of this legal updates are intended for general information only and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion. If you need further advice or explanation on the subject, please contact our firm. Please do not reproduce, transmit or distribute the contents therein in any form, or by any means as Legal Profession (Publicity) Rules 2001 restrict such circulation.<\/small><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><small>Note: This material is intended for general information with regard to the practice of YHA. This profile is not intended to create, and does not create a solicitor-client relationship. If you are interested in having YHA to represent you, you must call or visit our office to enable us to discuss the legal matter with you. YHA reserves our right to decline any representation which is in contravention with the Legal Profession Act 1976 and\/or the regulations therein.<\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident &#8211; such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6184,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6182","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-updates"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.5 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident - such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ms_MY\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident - such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-14T11:48:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/maritimenegli.avif\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1731\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"909\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"YHA Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"YHA Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minit\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"YHA Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef\"},\"headline\":\"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-14T11:48:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":677,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/maritimenegli.avif\",\"articleSection\":[\"Updates\"],\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/\",\"name\":\"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/maritimenegli.avif\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-14T11:48:16+00:00\",\"description\":\"In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident - such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/maritimenegli.avif\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/maritimenegli.avif\",\"width\":1731,\"height\":909},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\",\"name\":\"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm\",\"description\":\"YHA Law Firm is a leading law firm in Malaysia.Specialises in handling Civil,Maritime,Shipping Matters,Company Law,Family Law,Real Estate and many more\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ms-MY\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png\",\"width\":2080,\"height\":369,\"caption\":\"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/yhalaw\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef\",\"name\":\"YHA Admin\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/yhalaw.com.my\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","description":"In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident - such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/","og_locale":"ms_MY","og_type":"article","og_title":"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","og_description":"In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident - such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.","og_url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/","og_site_name":"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw","article_published_time":"2026-07-14T11:48:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1731,"height":909,"url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/maritimenegli.avif","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"YHA Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"YHA Admin","Est. reading time":"4 minit"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/"},"author":{"name":"YHA Admin","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/person\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef"},"headline":"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS","datePublished":"2026-07-14T11:48:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/"},"wordCount":677,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/maritimenegli.avif","articleSection":["Updates"],"inLanguage":"ms-MY"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/","name":"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS | Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/maritimenegli.avif","datePublished":"2026-07-14T11:48:16+00:00","description":"In Tom Eastwind 365 Sdn Bhd v The Owners of the Vessel \u201cIcon Sophia\u201d [2025] 9 MLJ 397, the High Court held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied in a maritime collision during an anchor deployment operation, allowing an inference of negligence against the tug owner. The Court clarified that the doctrine is not defeated merely because the defendant adduces evidence explaining the accident - such evidence goes to rebutting the inference, not preventing it. While liability was established due to the tug master\u2019s error of judgment in manoeuvring too close to a stationary barge, the plaintiff failed to properly prove its damages and was awarded only RM50,000. Notably, despite succeeding on liability, the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs after rejecting reasonable Calderbank offers, underscoring the risks of pursuing litigation without properly substantiated claims.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ms-MY","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ms-MY","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/maritimenegli.avif","contentUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/maritimenegli.avif","width":1731,"height":909},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/maritime-negligence-plaintiff-claimed-for-damages-caused-during-anchor-deployment-operation-calderbank-offers\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"MARITIME NEGLIGENCE \u2013 PLAINTIFF CLAIMED FOR DAMAGES CAUSED DURING ANCHOR DEPLOYMENT OPERATION \u2013 CALDERBANK OFFERS"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#website","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/","name":"Yew Huoi, How &amp; Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm","description":"YHA Law Firm is a leading law firm in Malaysia.Specialises in handling Civil,Maritime,Shipping Matters,Company Law,Family Law,Real Estate and many more","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ms-MY"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#organization","name":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ms-MY","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/YHA-Law-Logo-White-BG-New@2x-e1668772571446.png","width":2080,"height":369,"caption":"Yew Huoi, How & Associates Law Firm | yhalaw.com.my"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/yhalaw"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/#\/schema\/person\/f778c60834a29c5ec215ab62d3207bef","name":"YHA Admin","sameAs":["https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6182","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6182"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6182\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6183,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6182\/revisions\/6183"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6184"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6182"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6182"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/yhalaw.com.my\/my\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6182"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}