Archivi tag: anek lines

Seconda udienza preliminare 21.05.2019 – ammesse tutte le parti civili nel processo Norman Atlantic

TGR 21 maggio 2019 – Norman Atlantic, parenti vittime e sopravvissuti ammessi al processo penale

Dear Clients, on Tuesday May 21 2019 the second preliminary hearing of the criminal trial on the Norman Atlantic disaster was held in the Bitonto bunker hearingroom.

Let’s start by saying that ALL our clients were admitted as a civil party, and that this important result was by no means obvious or automatic or simple to obtain.

In fact, in the time from the previous hearing, in which we filed our request for the appearance in court, and this last hearing, the judge had assigned to the defendants an intermediate term for the filing of written memoirs with which to illustrate their exceptions and objections to the request to enter the process by passengers and family members, but also organizations and associations. Well, we can say that surely the lawyers (of Anek above all), have not been spared at all (and it must be said that they could also have done it with greater esteem and respect for the victims, as for example Costa Crociere did in the process on the sinking of the Concordia, which raised formal exceptions only against the cities and associations but not also about the constitution of a civil part of the passengers), but on the contrary they have once again (as in the civil trial) put into play every possible and imaginable procedural question, constraint of national and community legislation and of captious exception to try to prevent at any cost the request of the victims to participate in the criminal trial as parties in all aspects, and not only as spectators. Constituting as a civil party, in fact, allows the injured party from a committed crime, in addition to making a request to the judge for compensation on their damage suffered in relation to such conduct, but also play an important role as a private prosecution alongside the public one, exercised by the public prosecutor’s office, in the common search for truth and justice through the conviction of all those responsible for the disaster. Needless to say, the army of defendants’ lawyers would have preferred to have the trial without our unfriendly presence in the courtroom, and already the first heated controversy took place in the courtroom among lawyers, in a clearly nervousness due to the gravity of the charges, on one side, and the delicacy of the positions and the compensatory values ​​requested on behalf of the clients, on the other.

In their memoirs and subsequent discussion in the hearing room, the defenders of the Greek shipowner, but not only them, tried to enforce the rules of Reg. (EC) 392/2009 in the criminal trial which, as you now by know, provides (art 16, point 3 of the Athens Convention) a two-year preclusional term, which led us prudently to initiate a civil lawsuit in Bari in December 2016, thus claiming, in a very insidious way, that today it would not be possible for us to validly transfer the compensation action from the civil to the criminal trial, due to some alleged forfeiture and other (alleged) defects matured during the civil trial. Nevertheless the defendants’ defenses claimed that the nature and legitimacy of the requests was not adequately demonstrated and documented.

read more (leggi il resto)
Annunci

Fire emergency in Greece on Anek’s ferry΄El Venizelos’ – ΄ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΙΟΣ ΒΕΝΙΖΕΛΟΣ΄: ΜΙΑ ΑΚΟΜΗ ΠΥΡΚΑΓΙΑ ΞΕΣΠΑΣΕ ΣΕ ΟΧΗΜΑΤΑΓΩΓΟ ΠΛΟΙΟ ΤΩΝ ΑΝΕΚ LINES

In the night between August the 28th and the 29th 2018 the ship Eleftherios Venizelos, another ferry from Anek Lines, during its travel from Piraeus to Crete with 875 passengers and 141 crew on board, was hit by a serious fire in the garage area, so much that the Captain was forced to declare general emergency and abandonment of the ship.

The emergency operations were not easy and implied the intervent of two firefighting tug boats, ten tenders, 48 firefighters and two emergency teams, as the fire was very quickly expanding from the lower decks and heavy black smoke was inclosing the ship.

The dynamic of the new accident is similar to the disaster of the Norman Atlantic, which as this one, was operating under the flag of the Greek company ANEK: a vehicle parked on board caught fire so that from 12am the board started to send emergency signals to get help from the Coast Guard.

After we assisted dozens of passengers who suffered a devastating experience onboard of the Anek’s ferry Norman Atlantic in the nights of the 28/29 December 2014 where so many lost their life, an all others suffered for their personal safety and for the losses of their personal belongings and for which we already submitted to the Civil Court of Bari our law suit against Anek and Visemar (see our web page on such case: https://giustiziapernormanatlantic.wordpress.com/), we face another case with a fire that broke out in the car deck of a ferry.

The emergency operations on the Eleftherios Venizelos went on during all night and the ship was at the end escorted back into Piraeus and all the passengers were disambarked only during the morning of the 29 August.

Media sources report that the ship has had many problems operating so much that since 2014 it has a discontinuous use, with some short-term rentals (including one to the Greek government for the transportation of migrants from the islands) and sporadic income in service as a replace of other ships Anek stopped for repairs. This raises questions in relation to safety of the ship. These questions will be adressed by with a specific complaint we will file to authorities that have already opened an investigation to find out the causes of the fire and the reasons for the lack of containment of the flames in the garage by the drenching system, providing all the trial expert’s reports on Norman Atlantic about critical issues on fires in Ro/Ro ship’s garage open decks. Continua a leggere

Documento Newspaper on our client’s testimonies

An article from Documento newspaper in Greece, recently took into account our legal Team collegue Mr. Kriton Metaxopoulos and some of our client’s interview.

Numerous faults, omissions and violations of basic safety rules are detected in the report on the causes of the tragedy of the Norman Atlantic shipwreck from the experts appointed by the Italian Justice which is currently displayed in «Documento» newspaper. At the same time, people who experienced the events of December 28th 2014, talk to «Documento» newspaper and describe the dramatic moments they experienced in the Adriatic, where they literally faced death.

The appointed experts reported that the ship was overloaded with vehicles and especially refrigerator trucks. The results showed that the on board vehicles were more than the available sockets. In this context, many refrigerator trucks had their engines working while the ship was on board. Furthermore, the experts concluded that the fire caused by a vehicle engine/machine, a fact that may be related to the operation of the engines the on board refrigerator trucks. It is mentioned that the inadequacy of the available sockets on the ship compared with the number of refrigerator trucks became subject of the debate among captain Argillio Giaromazzi, ship-owner Argillio Giaromazzi and representative of ANEK, few hours before the fatal incident.  It is also noted that due to overload of the ship, the vehicles in parking lots were almost stuck with each other.

According to the appointed experts, the construction of the ship, the arrangement of its inner spaces and the time required for the activation of the ship’s fire-alarm system were the basic factors that the fire impossible to be extinguished on time.

Mr. Kriton Metaxopoulos, the lawyer who represents families of victims of the Norman Atlantic shipwreck along with Italian lawyers, mentioned in Documento newspaper the following: ‘’The facts resulted from questioning procedure until today and basically the experts’ findings confirm all the allegations and arguments of both families of the victims and tragedy survivors. In any case, according to my opinion, there is no doubt about the civil and criminal liability of the defendants’’.

Survivors’ Testimonies

  • Mr. Ioannis Vassalos (passenger): ‘’There was no plan and the crew was not on its duty positions.  The situation was out of control.’’
  • Mr. Olivier Coissard (French passenger): ‘’There were such high temperatures that our shoes melted and our bags got burnt.’’
  • Mr. Evangelos Tsoukis (passenger): ‘’Every one of us acted spontaneously. […] There was no coordinated action or any information by the crew…’’
  • Mr. Leonidas Konstantinidis (truck driver): ‘’We were trapped and fire was getting closer to us. The only option seemed to be the sea’’.

Incidente probatorio Norman Atlantic – i risultati della perizia

Nel procedimento penale Rg 20598/14 sul disastro marittimo del Norman Atlantic abbiamo finalmente raggiunto la fase conclusiva dell’indagine svolta dai periti nominati dal tribunale di Bari nell’ambito dell’incidente probatorio diretto dal Giudice delle Indagini Preliminari dott.ssa Alessandra Piliego. periti nominati dal tribunale di Bari nell’ambito dell’incidente probatorio diretto dal Giudice delle Indagini Preliminari dott.ssa Alessandra Piliego.

A partire dal 27 marzo 2017, ogni giorno e per una settimane di fila, si è tenuta udienza all’interno dell’aula bunker di Bitonto, onde consentire al collegio peritale di illustrare i risultati della loro indagine e – in una trattazione divisa per blocchi (caricamento e rizzaggio mezzi, incendio, vdr ed apparati di bordo, gestione emergenza, abbandono nave etc.) – i periti si sottoporranno all’esame delle parti per le varie osservazioni, integrazioni, contestazioni e domande di approfondimento.

Le udienze si sono aperte con le prime schermaglie sul tema dell’ordine di esame e controesame ai periti da parte dei vari difensori. La norma processuale (art. 401, V comma cpp) prevede infatti che le prove sono acquisite secondo le forme ed ordine di assunzione stabilite per il dibattimento, e dunque si deve iniziare l’esame con le proprie domande ai periti chi ha richiesto l’incidente probatorio (nella fattispecie i Pubblici Ministeri), seguendo con il controesame da parte degli avvocati difensori dei 18 soggetti indagati. A seguire i difensori delle parti offese (noi), che possono rivolgere domande ed osservazioni solo indirettamente ed attraverso il giudice, il quale, se le ritiene pertinenti, le formula ai periti (in quanto, durante questa fase processuale, le parti offese non sono ancora parti processuali vere e proprie, qualità che assumono solo nel momento in cui viene ammessa la loro costituzione di parte civile, dopo la richiesta di rinvio a giudizio), assieme alle domande di chiarimento che lei stessa riterrà opportuno svolgere in chiusura dell’esame. Ovviamente “parlare” per ultimi rappresenta un vantaggio processuale non indifferente, tanto che durante il dibattimento vero e proprio, l’avvocato difensore dell’imputato è in genere garantita sempre l’ultima “parola”. In questa circostanza tuttavia, nonostante la protesta dei difensori degli indagati di poter intervenire dopo la serie di domande degli avvocati di parte offesa, il GIP ha giustamente ritenuto di mantenere l’ordine previsto dal codice, anche se, con grande disponibilità verso tutti, ha consentito una occasionale inversione di questo ordine per esigenze di alcuni difensori di parte lesa, e comunque ha garantito la possibilità per tutti, PM e difensori degli indagati di tornare su alcuni eventuali punti toccati da domande delle parti civili.

Nella serie di udienze consecutive si è iniziato da una breve e sintetica presentazione, da parte dei periti, delle quasi 700 pagine della loro relazione e sulle loro conclusioni sull’incendio, sulle cause di probabile innesco, tempi di sviluppo e modalità di propagazione, per poi sottoporsi alle domande della Procura, partendo dalla fase di caricazione mezzi (ed è emersa, come vedremo, una certa pressione di Anek sull’equipaggio della NA per imbarcare un numero di camion frigo in modo eccessivo rispetto alla disponibilità di prese, e sempre senza preavviso), delle operazioni di rizzaggio (ovverosia di aggancio dei veicoli pesanti alle paratie a terra, per assicurare la stabilita del carico e bilanciamento nave, eseguite in modo approssimativo ed assolutamente inadeguato, ammassando i mezzi e, sopratutto gli autotreni, troppo vicini uno all’altro, continuando le operazioni di rizzaggio addirittura anche in navigazione, senza comunque portarle a termine), di collegamento dei camion frigo alle prese di corrente (poiché è stato chiarito come sia severamente vietato, durante la navigazione, alimentare il gruppo frigo dei veicoli da trasporto con vano di carico a temperatura controllata, attraverso i motorini diesel che, invece, mantengono autonomamente la refrigerazione durante la circolazione su strada dei mezzi, e quindi questi, una volta imbarcati, vanno disattivati e allacciati alla rete elettrica della nave), il numero delle prese e dei cavi disponibili a bordo (dando evidenza della presenza di più camion frigo rispetto alle prese e cavi di collegamento disponibili sulla nave, il che certamente da evidenza che alcuni autotreni -almeno 3 sul ponte 4- non erano stati collegati all’impianto elettrico della nave e quindi presumibilmente avevano il sistema di refrigerazione con motore a scoppio in funzione durante la navigazione) e molti altri elementi che dimostrano una spregiudicata approssimazione e generale violazione delle norme Solas e del codice SMS alla base della tragedia (parlano di insieme di “errori umani” e di “vistose e intrinseche debolezze” sotto il profilo ingegneristico come cause del disastro) sopratutto per quanto riguarda l’approntamento della nave e del suo carico al viaggio.

Cosa che, d’altronde, era ben nota visto che i nostri clienti lo avevano con molta chiarezza riferito e denunciato sin da subito: gli autotreni erano stati stipati nei ponti garage in modo tale che alcuni autisti erano stati costretti ad uscire dai finestrini non riuscendo ad aprire gli sportelli, non allineati ne agganciati alle “margherite” di fissaggio a terra per il rizzaggio, ed infatti i periti hanno riscontrato che la Safety Way (la via di passaggio per uscire, per eseguire i giri di ronda ed eventuali controlli oltre che come via di fuga) era parzialmente impegnata da alcuni mezzi e lasciava un angusto spazio di circa 40 cm per passare, rendendo oltretutto particolarmente difficoltoso il check sugli allarmi che sono poi scattati in plancia (sopratutto per un marinaio corpulento come Nardulli, che infatti non ha portato a termine la perlustrazione ma si è limitato a comunicare in plancia che il fumo rilevato dai sensori proveniva da un motore a scoppio in funzione), la dotazione e settaggio degli allarmi antincendio (e la loro funzione di rilievo calore/fumo che poteva essere attivata in modalità and/or), la dotazione, capacita e funzionamento degli impianti anti incendio passivi sulla nave (porte tagliafuoco, paratie A60) e di quelli attivi (sprinkler e drenching). Su questo punto, i periti hanno anche accertato che il sistema drencher, quello che si può attivare per zone di divisione della nave come sistema di estinzione massiva ad acqua sui ponti cargo, deve esser aperto manualmente ed in non più di due zone contemporaneamente (mentre nella fattispecie venne avviato, per negligenza, su almeno tre zone (diminuendo quindi la portata e capacita di estinzione dei getti) e su una zona errata (sul ponte 3 e non sul 4).

Secondo la perizia, l’origine dell’incendio si è invece originato proprio sul deck 4, e con ogni probabilità da un motorino a scoppio a servizio di uno dei camion frigo imbarcati, visto che, come spiegato in aula, questi compressori sono diesel raffreddati ad aria, e quando il veicolo è fermo tendono a surriscaldare molto rapidamente, con conseguente e concreto rischio di generare incendi. Di qui il rigoroso divieto di tenerli disattivati durante la navigazione e l’obbligo per tutti i mezzi con carico refrigerato, di allacciarsi alla rete elettrica della nave per garantire il controllo della temperatura sul vano di carico alimentare, o il normale funzionamento dei diversi motorini a servizio (es. per insufflare aria nel trasporto di pesce vivo).

Continua a leggere

Two years from the Norman Atlantic tragedy – Due anni dalla tragedia Norman Atlantic

norman-atlantic-in-fiammeExactly two years ago, on December the 28th 2014, the NORMAN ATLANTIC ferry, property of the Italian shipowner VISEMAR and rented by the Greek company ANEK LINES, departed from Greece and directed to Ancona, caught fire in the middle of the night off the Albanian coast, and in short time went drifting off the Adriatic sea, in a storm of six meters waves and force 8 wind, with almost 500 people on board and overrun with cars, trucks and Tir carrying goods from Greece to Italy, especially olive oil, which would then fuel the flames for days. The origins of the fire are still under investigation, via a procedure of recording evidence that, as required by the Public Prosecutor of Bari, will have to verify not only the evolution of the shipping incident, but also, and above all, the possible Crew responsibilities in emergency management on board, and the companies ones for malfunctions, as it seemed clear from the start, that the latter turned the fire – started from the deck 4 of the ship, in a real holocaust for dozens of people, 10 dead and over 19 missing, imprisoning the rest of the survivors on the top and outside deck of the ship, drifting inexorably and internally devoured by flames, and to be recovered only by helicopter and transferred one by one. A difficult rescue operation because of adverse weather and sea conditions, and that, despite having involved over 20 merchant and naval ships of different nationalities and several rescue helicopters, lasted for more than two days – an infinite time for those caught between the grip of toxic smokes, flames, incandescent floors and the icy cold of the water jets – sprayed continuously by emergency ships. The very few who managed to take their seats on lifeboats or reach the floating boat dropped overboard, lived an experience of terror and horror, even worse than those who remained trapped on the burning ferry.

No fire alarm was issued, no warning from the crew, and the passengers awoke at night between coulters of smoke and panic scenes. A panic which released – in many – the worst in human race. The first to abandon ship were some of the crew, dropping quickly the only usable lifeboat, with just a third of its precious capacity of persons. During the retrieve of the passengers using the baskets lowered from helicopters, others have literally attacked the rescuers, with bites and punches, just to be saved first, others refused to leave priority to women and children. Some people threw himself into the water to escape the flames, and was quickly swallowed by the waves of the icy December sea. Some bodies of drowned victims were found after days, torn apart by evident shark bites. Nearly twenty people are missing, but the count of those missing is certainly more serious, considering the presence on board of many illegal immigrants.

In the tragedy – however – there were also scenes of altruism and heroism, as in the case of the Orthodox priest who generously helped many shipwrecked persons to climb the dangerous rope ladder thrown by the rescue ship to the lifeboat on which they stood, leaving the way to all families before falling into the sea and get lost forever; or the greek doctor, who still works in Italy, which remained on board the ferry up until the end, providing his assistance to fellow sufferers, or like some truck drivers who, at great personal risk, managed to hook the towing tugs cable to the Norman Atlantic.

A horror lived in long and intense measure, in extreme psychophysical and weather conditions, which left indelible marks inside all people escaped from death, diagnosed in terms of “post-traumatic stress disorder“, studied for the first time in World War I and Vietnam veterans, and then ascertained as a psychological pathology, typical of disaster survivors, as in the case of the collapse of the twin towers.

After two years we are still waiting for the closing stage of the preliminary investigation by the magistracy and experts appointed by the Criminal Court of Bari. A report that will hopefully shed some light on the many shadows that since the beginning we have emphasized, with regard to ship-owners, the carrier, crew, those who certified the ship but also – and above all – in the maritime great transportation system, where the law of profit – too often – seems to prevail over the safety rules and accident prevention.

Avv. Massimiliano Gabrielli a bordo del norman atlanticOur team “Giustizia per Norman Atlantic” has represented so far about fifty people whose lives were devastated in various ways in the shipping incident, as passengers or as family members of victims or missing. Since the early days we were involved because of our experience in maritime disasters such as the sinking of the “Concordia” and “Jolly Nero“, and directly in the forefront we have provided (in person) assistance for immediate needs and to return home several families, support in the investigations on the DNA for the possible identification of missing persons, aid for the recover of the vehicles following the withdrawal of the vessel seizure (a year and a half after the accident), and then starting – on one hand – filing about 50 complaints and an intense work of investigations in the criminal proceedings – through our consultants and accessing the ship, and – on the other side – opening the negotiations with Anek & Visemar lawyers, in order to achieve a fair and honorable compensation in favor of our clients. Continua a leggere

Clearing of the parking lot and activities from judge experts

Questo slideshow richiede JavaScript.

Anek informs us that Cars are deposited in a port area guarded by almost three months after the discharge from the ship.  This area will be closed at the end of July. We encourage you to make the necessary arrangements for the withdrawal of cars from that area by the end of the month. After the end of the month of July, the cars will leave the guarded area and will be transferred to a different port unguarded area at the owner’s risk.

Meanwhile continued the access to the ship by the GIP experts, which will continue until the end of July. And ‘so certainly we will see a request for an extension of the term to file the report to the judge.

Costa Concordia case and Norman Atlantic

Costa Concordia and punitive damages

Costa Concordia and punitive damages

As known, the ruling on appeal in criminal proceedings about the sinking of Costa Concordia ship, has recently upheld the conviction of captain Francesco Schettino to 16 years in prison. Our legal team has participated in this criminal trial since the beginning, representing, as “Giustizia per la Concordia” the interests of circa a hundred passengers and one of the victims, through a civil request  of compensation filed in the criminal case, running in the court of Grosseto in first degree, and in front of the Court of appeal of Florence then.

Our work, however, it was also and above focused towards establishing facts, detection of truth and identification of ALL responsibilities that, over those undeniable, objective and subjective, of the Captain, have prepared the ground to realize the tragedy, and in particular those of the shipping company because of the many failures, the crew unpreparedness, lack of immediate demand of tugboats and criminal management of the emergency, all widely linked to a consolidated savings policy by Costa Crociere, and more generally from all the shipping companies of big ships.

In the first degree instance, our clients, which – differently many others passengers, did not accept the company offer (€ 11.000,00, giving up any further claims and rights), obtained the conviction for a provisional compensation payment by Costa Cruises, variable between 30 thousand and 50 thousand euro for each passenger. In Appeal the payment due has been increased of about 15 thousand euro, raising the provisionals in a range from 45.000,00 to 65.000,00 euro for each passenger. Up to six times the original offer , as accepted by most passengers!

About punitive damages, the case will proceed in Supreme Court, as recently in our country, we faced many openings to this important side effect of a conviction, in presence of gross negligence.

We can not but emphasize that the compensation ruling on the Concordia case, and the positive results obtained in that criminal trial, can ad will reflect also directly on the Norman Atlantic case, as the winding parameters of the damage used by the courts, took into account the existence of psychological harm, in terms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), resulting from the participation of our clients to a traumatic experience that left indelible marks in their lives.

Knowing in detail the personal story lived on board of the Norman Atlantic by all of our clients that we assist in this other major naval disaster, we can state without a doubt, that their experience on board of the ferry on fire has been extremely stronger than the one lived aboard of the Concordia, both in terms of duration (up to two days) that of the physical and psychological intensity (exposure to extreme conditions, intoxication from fumes, no assistance on board etc.) and finally major financial losses in the event for the loss of all goods and personal effects, destruction of vehicles and transports etc.

It is worth noting that insurers of both vessels are in fact the same subjects, (P&I club, referring to a joint consortium of shipping companies), and then all damages paid in favor of the Concordia passengers are an objective parameter that must be taken into consideration both at the time of further negotiations in the case of Norman Atlantic, and also in the case of a winding-up on the outcome of the criminal trial, in course of establishment in Bari.

In NA criminal proceedings, the Public Prosecutor office of Bari is finalizing the unloading and disposal of all destroyed vehicles by the outside decks of the ship, and experts are concluding their investigations, aimed at identifying the causes of the fire, the propagation mode of management emergency.

So we trust that soon there will be an acceleration in both the criminal proceedings in the possible negotiations in the accident of Norman Atlantic, which remains one of the largest in recent years in the Mediterranean.

______________

Costa Concordia and punitive damages

Costa Concordia and punitive damages

Come noto la sentenza di appello nel processo penale sul naufragio della Costa Concordia ha recentemente confermato la condanna del comandante Francesco Schettino a 16 anni di reclusione. Il nostro team legale ha partecipato sia dall’inizio a questo processo, rappresentando gli interessi di un centinaio di passeggeri e di una delle vittime, attraverso la costituzione di parte civile e la richiesta di una liquidazione risarcitorio già in sede penale da parte del tribunale di Grosseto prima, e della Corte d’appello di Firenze poi.Il nostro lavoro, però, si è incentrato anche e sopratutto in direzione dell’accertamento dei fatti, dell’accertamento della verità e della individuazione di TUTTE le responsabilità che, oltre quelle innegabili, oggettive e soggettive, del Comandante, hanno preparato il terreno al realizzi della tragedia, ed in particolare quelle della compagnia di navigazione per via dei tanti malfunzionamenti, della impreparazione dell’equipaggio, della mancata richiesta immediata dei rimorchiatori e della criminale gestione della emergenza, il tutto diffusamente legato ad una consolidata politica di risparmio da parte di Costa Crociere, e più in generale delle compagnie di navigazione delle grandi navi.

In primo grado i nostri clienti, che non hanno accettato la offerta di pagamento della società di 11mila euro (accettando la quale in moltissimi altri passeggeri, invece, hanno purtroppo rinunciato ad ogni ulteriore pretesa e diritto) hanno ottenuto la condanna di Costa Crociere al pagamento di una provvisionale sui risarcimenti, variabile tra 30mila e 50 mila euro per ciascun passeggero. In Appello tutti i risarcimenti sono stati aumentati di circa 15 mila euro, portando le provvisionali dai 45mila a 65 mila euro per ciascun passeggero. Fino a sei volte la offerta originaria, accettata dalla maggior parte degli altri passeggeri!

Riguardo ai danni punitivi, proseguiamo in Cassazione, visto che nel nostro paese si sono avuti molti riconoscimenti di questa particolare forma di condanna in presenza di colpa grave, e che le Sezioni Unite sono state recentemente chiamate a pronunciarsi al riguardo.

 Al riguardo non possiamo non evidenziare che la sentenza sulla Concordia ed i positivi risultati ottenuti nel processo penale non può che riflettersi anche sul caso del Norman Atlantic, in quanto i parametri di liquidazione del danno da parte dei giudici, hanno tenuto conto sostanzialmente della sussistenza di un danno psicologico, in termini di disturbo da stress post traumatico (ptsd), derivante dalla partecipazione dei nostri clienti ad una esperienza traumatica che ha lasciato segni indelebili nella loro vita.

Conoscendo nel dettaglio la storia personale vissuta a bordo del Norman Atlantic da parte dei tanti clienti che assistiamo anche in questo disastro navale, siamo in grado di affermare senza ombra di dubbio che la loro esperienza a bordo del traghetto in fiamme è stata estremamente più forte di quella vissuta a bordo della Concordia, sia in termini di durata (fino a due giorni) che di intensità fisica e psicologica (esposizione a condizioni psicofisiche estreme, intossicazione dai fumi, mancata assistenza a bordo etc.) ed infine maggiori danni patrimoniali in caso di perdita di tutti i beni ed effetti personali, distruzione degli automezzi e trasporti etc.

Vale la pena evidenziare che gli assicuratori di entrambe le navi sono di fatto gli stessi, riferibili ad un consorzio solidale tra compagnie di navigazione, e quindi i danni liquidati in favore dei passeggeri della Concordia costituiscono un parametro che dovrà essere preso in considerazione tanto in sede di ulteriori trattative per il caso del Norman Atlantic, che nel caso di una liquidazione ad esito del processo penale in corso di instaurazione a Bari.

 Nel procedimento penale, la Procura di Bari sta tuttora ultimando allo scarico e smaltimento degli automezzi distrutti dai ponti esterni della nave, ed i periti stanno concludendo le loro attività di indagine, volte alla individuazione delle cause dell’incendio, modalità di propagazione di gestione della emergenza.

 Confidiamo quindi che a breve ci sarà una accelerazione sia nel procedimento penale che nelle possibili trattative nell’incidente del Norman Atlantic, che resta uno dei più gravi degli ultimi anni nel mediterraneo.