The International Shipwreck Conference

organised by wreck enthusiasts for wreck enthusiasts

The ss. Storaa

Re: R. v. Fogg & Secretary of State for Defence

The ss. Storaa was a Danish merchantman taken as prize by the Crown in 1942. She sailed under a red ensign, had a mercantile crew, was administered by a civil department (Ministry of War Transport) for whom she was managed by civilian shipbrokers but was a Defensively Equipped Merchant Ship (DEMS) with 5 RN gunners aboard. Sailing in convoy, escorted by RN vessels, she was sunk in 1943 off Hastings by an E-Boat (German torpedo boat).

Previously, the 1986 Act was believed to apply only to warships and other vessels ‘... used for the purposes of the Armed Forces...’ (s.9). The daughters of one of the RN gunners, lost when the ship was sunk, applied for designation of the wreck. The application was rejected by the Secretary of State on the ground that the ss. Storaa was a merchant vessel and the Act only applied to such vessels in limited circumstances. An analogy was drawn with the circumstances when a merchant vessel could be said to be acting as a ‘quasi-warship’ or on a ‘war like operation’ for war risk purposes (on which there is considerable appellate authority).

The decision was taken to judicial review and quashed, on the basis that the Secretary of State had erred in law in his interpretation of the Act. The MOD appealed to the Court of Appeal and lost. The application for review was supported strongly by the Merchant Navy Association, as was the preparation of the application. The Association is on record as seeking to establish that the 1986 Act applies to all merchant vessels lost in hostilities.

The case is of significance because:

· many such vessels have been sold to salvors (the Storaa’s cargo was sold for salvage in 1949 to what is now Smit and the hull in 1985)
· designation of such vessels could infringe the proprietary rights of such salvors under Article 1 of First Protocol to the ECHR
· merchant losses considerably exceeded naval lossses and designation would impose a considerable administrative burden on MOD and Department for Transport
· even with the benefit of the Ct. of Appeal’s decision it is unclear in law which merchant vessels would fall within the terms of the Act and which would not
· large scale designations of merchantile wrecks could hinder seabed development and other economic activities
· there is evidence that Parliament intended the Act to apply to merchant losses only in very limited circumstances
· the very wide interpretation given to the Act could encompass most mercantile losses
· this is the first time the Act has come before the courts

Click here to download a Powerpoint of Michael William's talk