Every MV Hondius passenger signed a clause that says the cruise company isn't liable for their death. What does this actually mean legally?

E4 Reddit (hantavirus search) · 2026-05-14 · Netherlands

I've been following the MV Hondius story closely, 3 people dead, 150 passengers stranded off West Africa after a hantavirus outbreak. One detail that hasn't appeared in any of the mainstream coverage is the terms and conditions clause that every passenger accepted when they booked. Here's what Oceanwide Expeditions' terms and conditions say. this is live on their website, and I archived it before they could change it: "OE is therefore not liable for any damage, such as but not limited to (bodily) injury, illness, death etc. whatever the reason or cause may be, including consequential and/or indirect (commercial) damages as set forth in par" My questions for this community: 1. How enforceable is a clause like this? My understanding is that blanket liability waivers have limits. particularly in cases of gross negligence. If Oceanwide failed to maintain proper sanitation standards and that contributed to the outbreak, does the waiver still hold? 2. Does jurisdiction matter here? Oceanwide is a Dutch company. The ship departed from Argentina. Passengers are from the US, UK, Germany, and other countries. Which country's courts would even hear a case, and does the answer change depending on where the passenger is from? 3. Is there a class action possibility? The Ruby Princess COVID case (2020) resulted in the first successful class action against a cruise operator. Does the MV Hondius situation have similar potential, or does the Oceanwide terms and conditions structure make that impossible? 4. What should passengers be doing right now? Specifically, the families of the three who died. Is there a window for action that closes quickly? Evidence that needs to be preserved? I'm not a lawyer. I'm someone who has been researching how travel contracts expose consumers and found this case to be the clearest example I've seen of the gap between what passengers assume they're protected by and what the contract actually says. I've also documented that this clause pattern appeared in: The Disney wrongful death case (2024): arbitration clause in a Disney+ free trial stripped a widower of his right to a jury trial after his wife died at Disney World. The Ruby Princess (2020): class action waiver forced each of 900 infected passengers to fight a billion-dollar company individually Happy to share the archived terms and conditions link and any other documentation that helps the discussion. Location: Tunisia (but the passengers are from the US, UK, Germany, Netherlands, so I'm curious how jurisdiction works across all of them) submitted by /u/omar_builds to r/legaladvice [link] [comments]

Read at source (Reddit (hantavirus search)) →

HORIZON metadata

Open the live outbreak map →