Judicial Service Guarantees for High-Quality Development of the Marine Economy: Typical Cases

On February 27, the Supreme People’s Court held the 11th press conference titled “Welcoming the Two Sessions, Upholding Justice, Starting a New Journey,” releasing typical cases of judicial services supporting the high-quality development of the marine economy.

Case 1

Innovative Risk Mitigation Model for Financing to Support the Development of Offshore Wind Power Industry

— Dispute over ship leasing contracts involving Rongmou Leasing Tianjin Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Yuming Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. and others

【Basic Facts】

In July 2020, Rongmou Leasing Tianjin Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Yuming Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. signed a “Financial Leasing Contract,” agreeing that Rongmou Leasing Tianjin would lease out a self-elevating wind turbine installation vessel for offshore wind operations via sale-leaseback, financing Shanghai Yuming 346 million yuan for 5 years, with total rent of 442 million yuan. On the same day, Rongmou Leasing Tianjin signed guarantee, mortgage (property), equity pledge, and marine wind power equipment mortgage contracts with eight defendants, providing joint liability guarantees and mortgaging property, equity, and offshore wind equipment, all registered accordingly. After Rongmou Leasing Tianjin paid the financing funds, Shanghai Yuming Marine Engineering defaulted on part of the rent and failed to pay further. Consequently, Rongmou Leasing Tianjin filed a lawsuit against Shanghai Yuming Marine Engineering and others, demanding over 300 million yuan in rent, overdue fines, and asserting 11 claims including joint guarantees, mortgages, and pledges.

【Judgment】

In April 2024, the Shanghai Maritime Court accepted the case. Under court mediation, the parties reached an agreement: the plaintiff agreed to partial rent and penalty reduction; the debt amount was confirmed at 236 million yuan; repayment would be prioritized from proceeds of sale of the wind platform vessel; property preservation measures against the nine defendants would be gradually lifted according to repayment progress. The agreement clarified responsibilities and order among guarantors, mortgagors, and pledgors. If the defendants breach the agreement, the debt amount would no longer be reduced, and the plaintiff could realize claims through mortgage disposal, pledge enforcement, or guarantee pursuit, and apply for enforcement. The Shanghai Maritime Court issued a civil mediation order in July 2024, and the wind platform vessel was successfully sold and put back into use.

【Significance】

Offshore wind projects involve large investments, long cycles, and specialized equipment. High-quality development of the offshore wind industry relies on strong support from financial leasing, which also disperses risks and safeguards claims through multi-layered guarantees. The Shanghai Maritime Court thoroughly examined the multi-guarantee system, confirmed the legality and enforceability of the risk mitigation plan, and promoted phased debt repayment linked with property release, effectively protecting leasing companies’ rights while avoiding prolonged litigation and asset idling. This dispute, involving ten parties and claims exceeding 300 million yuan, was swiftly resolved in 78 days, demonstrating the court’s proactive response to the needs of marine innovation and high-quality judicial services to promote the marine economy’s development.

Case 2

Precisely Defining Exploration and Development Responsibilities to Support Marine Energy Technology Innovation

— Dispute over subrogation rights between a property insurance branch and a Singaporean maritime service company

【Basic Facts】

In 2018, the Marine Geological Survey Bureau and a Singaporean maritime service company, along with an unrelated technology company, conducted natural gas hydrate (flammable ice) drilling and logging in a continental shelf area southwest of Hainan Province. The Singaporean company was responsible for drilling; the technology company handled logging. During operations, a blowout occurred at nearly 2000 meters below the seabed, resulting in the loss of the lower drill string and logging equipment. The plaintiff, a branch of a property insurance company, insured the drilling equipment and, after paying compensation, filed a subrogation claim against the Singaporean company, demanding 8.4 million yuan plus interest.

【Judgment】

The Haikou Maritime Court held that the case involved marine resource exploration within China’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, thus under its jurisdiction. The Singaporean company and the technology company lacked sufficient preparation for the geological risks involved, and their mishandling contributed to the blowout and equipment loss. The court ordered the Singaporean company to compensate the insurance company over 4.53 million yuan plus interest. The parties appealed, but the Hainan Higher People’s Court upheld the original judgment.

【Significance】

Flammable ice is a new clean marine energy resource mainly distributed in deep-sea seabeds. Its exploration and extraction are key directions for China’s marine energy development, characterized by high thresholds, risks, and technical complexity. This case demonstrated the court’s thorough analysis of accident causes, accurate determination of rights and responsibilities, and detailed discussion of advanced marine equipment and technology, such as underwater communication and autonomous vehicles. It showcased judicial professionalism in handling complex, high-risk marine infringement cases and provided valuable reference for marine resource development cases, emphasizing the importance of legal risk management in marine innovation.

Case 3

Legally Differentiating Technical Development Risks to Ensure Autonomous Innovation of Marine Equipment

— Dispute over design and construction contract for a deep-sea aquaculture platform in Ningde

【Basic Facts】

Ningde Industrial Co. (buyer) and Ningde Marine Construction & Development Co. (seller) signed a “Design and Construction Contract” for the “Ningde Deep-sea Aquaculture Platform (No. 1)” in 2020, with a total price of nearly 75 million yuan. In July 2023, the platform completed installation and testing in the designated waters, awaiting final acceptance. On July 24, 2023, to prevent Typhoon Doksuri, the platform was evacuated. Subsequently, it was severely damaged and sank. Ningde Industrial notified the seller to terminate the contract, demanding refund and damages. Disputes arose over contract termination, breach, and liability, leading to litigation.

【Judgment】

The Xiamen Maritime Court found that the contract had mixed attributes of technology development, construction, and sale. The platform, as a new type of marine equipment, involved technical innovation risks. The damage before delivery was a manifestation of development risk, not due to breach by the seller. The court confirmed the contract termination, ordered the seller to refund the paid amount, but did not support claims for supporting costs, management fees, or penalties, as the plaintiff failed to prove breach caused the damages. Both parties appealed; the Fujian Higher People’s Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original ruling.

【Significance】

This case involved a deep-sea aquaculture platform, a new marine equipment, with the court carefully analyzing innovation risks, distinguishing development risks from contractual breaches, and sharing the burden of R&D failure. It reflected judicial support for marine technological innovation, clarified legal relationships in hybrid contracts, and provided guidance for marine engineering disputes. It also highlighted the importance of risk-sharing mechanisms, insurance, and guarantees in marine innovation projects, promoting a legal environment conducive to marine technological progress.

Case 4

Efficient Maritime Preservation Measures to Ensure Supply Chain Stability

— Application for maritime preservation by a Shanghai import-export company

【Basic Facts】

On April 9, 2024, a Shanghai import-export company, as the holder of a bill of lading, requested the detention of the Panamanian-flagged vessel “S.” The vessel’s operator refused to berth and unload cargo, citing disputes over other voyages’ freight and detention fees, and anchored at Dalian Changxing Island. The company applied for vessel detention. Investigation revealed the vessel carried about 270,000 tons of crude oil valued at over 1 billion yuan. The operator’s refusal to unload cargo threatened the production of a major petrochemical enterprise and supply chain stability. The court acted swiftly, requiring sufficient security, and issued a detention order on April 10, 2024, leading to the vessel’s detention at the anchorage. The court coordinated with relevant authorities, persuaded the foreign captain to cooperate, and ensured the safe unloading of the oil. During the process, disputes were quickly resolved, and the vessel was released, with the oil safely unloaded. The parties expressed appreciation for the court’s efficient and fair enforcement.

【Significance】

As one of the world’s largest crude oil importers, China relies heavily on maritime transportation for oil imports. Ensuring the safety and smooth trade of oil is vital for high-quality marine economic development. The court’s strict, fair, and efficient enforcement prevented major safety risks, safeguarded oil delivery, and facilitated dispute resolution, providing legal support for the stability of the oil supply chain and the marine industry.

Case 5

Small Measures to Solve Big Problems, Promoting the Development of the Bonded Fuel Oil Industry

— Dispute over supply contracts between a ship fuel company, a shipping company, and a materials supplier

【Basic Facts】

In 2014, the legal representative of a materials company sold the “Y” vessel to a Panamanian shipping company for 2 million USD. In 2020, a sales representative of the shipping company signed a fuel supply contract with a ship fuel company via fax, supplying bonded fuel oil worth 346,700 USD. Later, the materials company paid part of the amount on behalf of the shipping company, and the sales representative confirmed a debt of 284,480 USD on the company’s account statement. The fuel company then sued the shipping and materials companies for the unpaid amount plus interest.

【Judgment】

The Ningbo Maritime Court held that the supply contract had the closest connection to China and applied Chinese law. The court proved that the materials and shipping companies had personnel, business, and financial overlap, constituting legal personality confusion. It ordered the shipping and materials companies to jointly pay 284,480 USD for fuel and interest. The parties reached a settlement and fulfilled the judgment.

【Significance】

Marine fuel oil is a key energy source for international shipping, affecting port competitiveness. China’s Zhejiang Free Trade Pilot Zone has enhanced global resource allocation for oil products, making Ningbo-Zhoushan Port a leading fuel oil port. The court’s thorough fact-finding and legal application protected the rights of fuel suppliers, holding related domestic companies jointly liable for unpaid fuel, thus safeguarding industry interests and promoting a healthy, market-oriented legal environment for marine fuel supply.

Case 6

Clarifying the Legal Nature of Offshore Platforms to Support Deep-sea Marine Ranch Construction

— Dispute over rescue contract involving Zhuhai Heng’s deep-sea aquaculture platform

【Basic Facts】

Zhuhai Heng’s deep-sea intelligent aquaculture platform “Bay Area M.” was damaged during towing from Dalian to Zhuhai. Zhuhai Heng signed rescue, towing, and installation contracts with Zheng. Zheng performed rescue, towing, and installation in designated waters. After completion, Zhuhai Heng failed to pay full fees. Zheng sued for payment and damages.

【Judgment】

The Guangzhou Maritime Court held that the platform, lacking navigation capability, is not a vessel under the Maritime Law but qualifies as property under the law’s definition of non-permanently attached property, thus rescue operations are maritime rescue. Zhuhai Heng’s failure to pay constitutes breach. The court ordered Zhuhai Heng and its parent company Beijing Zhong to jointly pay rescue and related costs, as their assets are not legally separate. The case was finalized.

【Significance】

With China’s modernization, marine economy development faces new legal issues, such as whether offshore platforms are vessels. The court clarified that such platforms are not vessels but qualify as property, and rescue operations are maritime rescue. This provides legal guidance for deep-sea ranch construction and related disputes, supporting legal regulation and development of marine ranching.

Case 7

Joint Efforts to Resolve Major Accident Disputes, Supporting Healthy Development of Offshore Wind Power

— Series of disputes over typhoon damage to offshore wind platforms operated by a marine technology company

【Basic Facts】

On July 2, 2022, affected by Typhoon “Chaba,” the offshore wind platform “F. 001” operated by Marine Tech was anchored for typhoon prevention in Yangjiang Zhaopo, but encountered strong winds and waves, resulting in anchor loss, collision with multiple wind turbines, and sinking. The vessel was a total loss. Marine Tech sued the insurance company for compensation. Several plaintiffs, including a renewable energy company, sued Marine Tech for damages to wind turbines and facilities. Additional disputes over salvage costs arose. In total, 10 cases with claims totaling 1.26 billion yuan. Major issues included insurance payout, liability limits, and salvage costs.

【Judgment】

The Guangzhou Maritime Court ruled on four cases, but parties appealed to the Guangdong Higher People’s Court. The higher court analyzed the facts, focusing on the platform’s nature and applicable maritime liability limits, and established a comprehensive mediation approach: combining insurance claims, multiple cases, and proportional recovery from the liability limit fund. It promoted cross-verification of loss calculations, and guided parties to reach consensus on compensation and distribution ratios. The court also organized industry forums on high-quality marine development, jointly assessing risks and proposing solutions, injecting judicial momentum into marine innovation.

【Significance】

Developing offshore wind is vital for energy restructuring and industry transformation. Construction environments are complex, with frequent disputes, extensive damages, and high costs. This series reflects the legal complexity of emerging marine industries. The courts emphasized pre-trial analysis, communication, and post-judgment extension, successfully mediating the series of “F. 001” accident disputes, balancing rights and responsibilities, and supporting industry recovery. It boosts confidence in offshore wind investment and insurance, elevates China’s offshore wind industry, and enhances judicial efficiency in marine cases, serving the development of marine new productivity.

【Source: People’s Court Daily】