Bisso v. Inland Waterways Corp.

Background

A uncrewed oil barge being towed up the Mississippi River struck a bridge pier and sank after negligent handling by the towboat. The towing contract said the tow was at the barge’s “sole risk” and that the towboat crew would be treated as servants of the barge. Lower courts enforced those clauses and denied the barge owner damages, so the case reached the high court to resolve whether such clauses can block liability for negligent towage.

Reasoning

The Court reviewed prior decisions and maritime practice and found a long judicial tradition that disfavors contracts letting service providers escape liability for their own negligence. The majority emphasized two practical goals: discouraging negligence by making wrongdoers pay and protecting parties with less bargaining power from unfair terms. The Court distinguished pilotage clauses (which the Court has sometimes upheld) because pilots occupy a special, regulated role. Applying admiralty law and public‑policy reasons, the Court held that clauses trying to make the tug immune from negligent towage are unenforceable.

Real world impact

The decision means towboat operators generally cannot use blanket contract language to avoid paying for damage they cause by negligent towing. Owners of towed vessels and shippers are protected from being forced to accept those risks. The ruling may shift costs through insurance or contract pricing and will guide how towing agreements are written going forward.

Dissents or concurrances

One Justice concurred, agreeing the rule should stand absent better economic evidence to change it. A dissent argued the courts should not overturn commercial bargaining freedom and urged deference to industry practice and Congress.