Courts | Game installer responsible for Fisherman’s Wharf accident

The Court of Second Instance (TSI) has ruled that the designer and installer of a powerboat game called “River of Fire,” which paralyzed a Chinese tourist at the Fisherman’s Wharf in 2006, is required to return the equivalent of over MOP2 million in compensation to its insurance company.
The accident occurred within the Fisherman’s Wharf’s artificial volcano, which had just been opened to visitors. It injured a woman and her son who came to visit Macau from the mainland, with the mother ultimately suffering life-long paraplegia in her lower body as a result.
The victims were then compensated RMB3.8 million by the Companhia de Seguros da China (Macau) S.A, the insurance company of the game designer, Sanderson-Design. The Fisherman’s Wharf paid about MOP376,000 in total for the victims’ medical expenses and accommodation for the family’s visit.
However, the insurance company later found out that the game designer and installer was also responsible for the malfunction, and thus turned to the Court of First Instance (TJB) to seek an order for Sanderson-Design to return its compensation.
According to the insurance company, before the accident happened, a powerboat ahead of the victims’ boat had been stuck on the conveyor belt. The facility’s sensors also failed to respond so the game’s automatic braking system did not start. The staff member responsible for monitoring the game’s operations didn’t notice the abnormal situation either. Eventually, the two victims were thrown overboard in a chain collision of four powerboats on the conveyor belt.
The TJB ruled in favor of the insurance company, which was opposed by the Sanderson-Design, who in turn then appealed to the TSI. The game designer claimed that the court could not identify that it was at fault in the accident, emphasizing that the Fisherman’s Wharf personnel were the ones responsible for supervising the game’s operation. Moreover, the company argued that the victim’s lifelong paraplegia was not evident, nor was her need of hiring a carer.  As such, the designer was not required to provide compensation. In addition, the appellant asked the court to deduct from the compensation amount the expenses that were already paid by the Fisherman’s Wharf.
However, the TSI ruled in favor of the insurance company and against the “River of Fire” designer, indicating that “the life of the injured female tourist has completely shifted” since the accident. The TSI agreed with the TJB’s judgment that it was evident enough to draw this conclusion based on the victim’s life-long paraplegia, and that the individual responsible for the game’s operation should not be the facility’s owner, but its designer and installer.
Partially upholding the TJB’s original verdict, the TSI requested that Sanderson-Design return the compensation to its insurance company, but approved the deduction of the amount paid by the Fisherman’s Wharf. BY