Expertise / Shipping & Maritime
Marine and shipping expert witnesses
Technical and commercial maritime expertise for casualty, cargo and charterparty disputes.
Request a shipping & maritime expertA container ship at berth
Maritime disputes demand experts who have lived the industry (master mariners, naval architects, marine engineers and shipping commercial specialists) and who can translate technical detail into evidence that holds up in court or arbitration.
In shipping & maritime, the difference between a strong case and a weak one often comes down to whether the expert truly understands the sector. Generalist opinion rarely survives scrutiny on specialist questions, and a tribunal gives little weight to evidence that misreads how shipping & maritime actually works. We focus here precisely because the issues are technical, the stakes are high, and the wrong expert is an expensive mistake.
What instructing through us looks like
Tell us the issues, the forum and your timeline. We check fit, availability and conflicts, then send a short, honest shortlist. You review CVs and speak with the expert before instructing. New to the process? See our guide on how to instruct an expert witness.
Enquire
Tell us about your shipping & maritime matter
Describe the issues and the forum. We check fit, availability and conflicts, then come back with a short shortlist. Enquiries are confidential and create no obligation.
- Tell us the matterShare the issues, the sector and your timeline. No obligation, treated in confidence.
- We shortlistWe identify experts whose experience genuinely fits, and check availability and conflicts.
- You instructYou review CVs and speak directly with the expert before instructing on your terms.
What these disputes actually turn on
Marine cases rarely divide on the law. A collision claim turns on which vessel breached which COLREG and when, and the apportionment that follows. A cargo claim turns on whether damage arose from inherent vice, insufficient packing or improper stowage, and on the vessel's condition at the moment of loading. A charterparty dispute turns on laytime calculation, off-hire events, or whether a speed and consumption warranty was met on the voyages actually performed. Each of those is a question of fact that a tribunal cannot resolve without someone who has done the job.
That is why the choice of discipline matters as much as the choice of individual. A naval architect is the right expert on stability and structural failure and the wrong one on bridge watchkeeping practice. A master mariner can speak to what a prudent officer of the watch would have done and should not be asked to opine on hull girder strength. Instructing the wrong discipline is the most common reason marine evidence is given little weight.
What the expert will examine, and what degrades first
Marine evidence has a shorter shelf life than most. The single most important step after a casualty is preserving data that overwrites itself on a fixed cycle.
- VDR and S-VDR data — the rolling capture overwrites, typically within 12 to 48 hours. The consolidated record is longer but not indefinite. This is the first thing to secure.
- Bridge audio and radar/ECDIS replay — the only objective account of what was seen, said and decided on the bridge.
- AIS history — independently held, useful for reconstructing track and speed where onboard data is lost.
- Engine room logs, alarm printouts and planned maintenance records — central to machinery damage and unseaworthiness allegations.
- Pre-loading and outturn surveys, stowage plans, reefer and ventilation logs — cargo condition claims usually stand or fall on these.
- Class and flag state records, and the P&I club's own survey — often the earliest technical account of the casualty.
Crew disperse quickly and often to different countries. Statements taken within days are materially better than statements taken months later, and an expert instructed early can tell you which crew members actually matter and what to ask them.
What the report has to address
A marine expert report is tested against the applicable framework, not against general seamanship. Depending on the issue that means the COLREGs rule by rule, SOLAS and the ISM Code, the Hague-Visby Rules on carrier obligations and due diligence as to seaworthiness, the IMDG Code for dangerous goods, class rules for structural and machinery matters, and the CMR or relevant carriage regime where the claim crosses into road or multimodal transport. Above all it is tested against CPR Part 35: the duty is to the tribunal, the range of opinion must be stated, and the basis of every conclusion must be traceable.
Most of these matters are arbitrated rather than litigated. Reports prepared for LMAA arbitration are read by tribunals who know the sector well and who will notice an expert straying outside their competence, or a reconstruction presented with more confidence than the surviving data supports.
Five questions worth asking before you instruct
- Have they held the relevant rank on the relevant ship type, or is the experience adjacent?
- Can they perform the reconstruction themselves, or will they need a separate VDR analyst — and is that cost in the estimate?
- Have they been cross-examined in LMAA arbitration or the Commercial Court, and how recently?
- What is their connection to the owners, charterers, class society and P&I clubs involved? The market is small and conflicts are common.
- Will they tell you plainly if the available data does not support the opinion you were hoping for?
Why marine evidence gets discounted
In our experience three failures recur. The expert opines outside their discipline and is exposed on it. The reconstruction is built on partial VDR or AIS data without the gaps being acknowledged, so the whole analysis becomes unreliable once the omission surfaces. Or the report argues the conclusion rather than the method — addressing seamanship in general terms instead of working through the COLREGs in sequence, which is what a tribunal is actually asking for.
The disciplines, and when each is needed
- Master mariner — navigation and watchkeeping, COLREGs compliance, pilotage, anchoring, berthing and port operations.
- Marine engineer — machinery failure, the planned maintenance regime, fuel and lubricant problems, and unseaworthiness arising from machinery.
- Naval architect — stability, structural failure, loading and longitudinal strength, design questions and salvage engineering.
- Cargo surveyor or cargo scientist — the condition and cause of cargo damage: moisture, temperature, contamination, and the liquefaction of solid bulk cargoes.
- Average adjuster or marine insurance expert — general average, hull and machinery and P&I recoveries, and the quantum that follows.
- Chartering and shipbroking expert — market rates, damages on wrongful termination, laytime and demurrage practice, speed and consumption.
Larger casualties usually need two or three of these disciplines working from the same factual record. The order matters: the expert who reconstructs what happened should be instructed first, so that the quantum and insurance experts are working from a settled account rather than competing versions of it.
Where these disputes are decided
Most charterparty and many cargo claims go to LMAA arbitration in London, where tribunals are drawn from the industry and expect experts to speak its language. Collision, salvage and limitation actions are heard in the Admiralty Court, where the parties file a Collision Statement of Case before disclosure. Larger commercial disputes go to the Commercial Court, and a growing share of Asia-related matters are arbitrated in Singapore or Hong Kong. Whatever the forum, an expert giving evidence in England and Wales owes the duty set out in CPR Part 35, and the court will test whether their expertise genuinely covers each issue they address, as the Supreme Court explained in Kennedy v Cordia.
Key authorities and further reading
- COLREGs: International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (IMO) — the rule-by-rule framework for any collision opinion
- The ISM Code (IMO) — safety management systems, often central to seaworthiness and limitation
- Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971 (Hague-Visby Rules) — carrier obligations, due diligence and defences in cargo claims
- LMAA Terms 2021 — procedure, including expert evidence, in London maritime arbitration
- Marine Accident Investigation Branch reports — published investigations that often frame the technical issues
- CPR Part 35: Experts and Assessors — the expert's overriding duty to the court
- Practice Direction 35 — what an expert report must contain
- Kennedy v Cordia (Services) LLP [2016] UKSC 6 — the Supreme Court on when expert evidence is admissible
Coverage
Areas we cover in shipping & maritime
FAQ
Common questions
What does a Shipping & Maritime expert witness do?
A Shipping & Maritime expert witness gives independent, objective opinion to a court or tribunal on specialist issues within shipping & maritime. The overriding duty is to the court, not to the instructing party. That opinion typically takes the form of a written report and, where required, oral evidence.
When should I instruct a Shipping & Maritime expert?
As early as the issues become clear. Instructing early helps you weigh the strengths and weaknesses of a case, scope the evidence proportionately, and avoid a rushed report against a looming deadline.
How do you choose your Shipping & Maritime experts?
We select on substance: relevant qualifications, genuine shipping & maritime experience, and an understanding of an expert's duties in litigation and arbitration. Where an expert has limited experience of giving evidence, we say so.
Can you provide master mariners and naval architects?
Yes. We work with master mariners, marine engineers and naval architects who can address casualty, seaworthiness, cargo and charterparty issues in court and arbitration.
Need an expert in shipping & maritime?
Describe the matter and we'll identify specialists who fit.
Request an expertOther sectors