Lloyd's List is part of Maritime Intelligence

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited, registered in England and Wales with company number 13831625 and address c/o Hackwood Secretaries Limited, One Silk Street, London EC2Y 8HQ, United Kingdom. Lloyd’s List Intelligence is a trading name of Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited. Lloyd’s is the registered trademark of the Society Incorporated by the Lloyd’s Act 1871 by the name of Lloyd’s.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call UK support at +44 (0)20 3377 3996 / APAC support at +65 6508 2430

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

Finnish court throws out Eagle S cable-cutting case

The court determined the matter was for the vessel’s flag state, rather than Finnish law

Damage caused by the tanker did not meet the threshold to apply Finnish law, as the incident occurred in international waters

CHARGES against a master and two other crew members of now-sanctioned tanker Eagle S (IMO: 9329760) have been dismissed by the Helsinki District Court.

The Cook Islands-flagged vessel was thought to be behind damage to the Estlink2 cable on December 25, 2024.

Finnish prosecutors said the vessel dragged its anchor for around 90 km, cutting five cables. The National Prosecution Authority charged the master and first and second officers with aggravated criminal mischief and aggravated interference with communications in August 2025.

 

But the court found that “the act did not result in the kinds of consequences to Finland’s energy supply or telecommunications that are required to satisfy the statutory definition of criminal mischief or aggravated criminal mischief”.

The incident took place in international waters but in Finland’s exclusive economic zone, the court said in its judgment. According to the charges levelled against the three seafarers, Finnish law could be applied to the incident because its consequences were felt in Finland.

There was no allegation the three crew members intentionally damaged the cable, but prosecutors claimed they were aware of the poor state of repair of the anchor’s windlass and had neglected their duties and were thus guilty of lawbreaking on this basis.

The court, however, said any issues of negligence on board were a matter for the vessels’ flag state or the seafarers’ native states, and didn’t fall within Finland’s jurisdiction.

Notably, the court said its decision was not final.

 

 

Related Content

Topics

  • Related Vessels
  • UsernamePublicRestriction

    Register

    LL1155011

    Ask The Analyst

    Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
    Ask The Analyst

    Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

    All fields are required.

    Please make sure all fields are completed.

    Please make sure you have filled out all fields

    Please make sure you have filled out all fields

    Please enter a valid e-mail address

    Please enter a valid Phone Number

    Ask your question to our analysts

    Cancel