Louisiana Passenger Sues Royal Caribbean Over Slip-and-Fall on Wet Deck Aboard Harmony of the Seas

A resident of Louisiana has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., alleging that he suffered severe injuries after slipping on a wet deck surface near the Central Park area aboard the Harmony of the Seas. The case, Robert A. Broussard v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 1:25-cv-20859-BB), raises significant concerns about wet deck hazards, cruise line negligence, and the failure to warn passengers of known dangers.

Background of the Case

On March 9, 2024, Robert A. Broussard, a fare-paying passenger aboard the Harmony of the Seas, was walking on Deck 8 near the Central Park area when he suddenly slipped on an accumulation of water. The lawsuit alleges that the wet condition was caused by crew members watering planters with spray hoses, which led to excess water pooling on the deck surface.

Broussard contends that:

• The water blended into the flooring, making it difficult to detect.
• No warning signs were placed to alert passengers of the hazard.
• Crew members failed to dry or mop the wet area, despite knowing that passengers frequently walked through this section of the ship.
• After his fall, he hit his head on a raised concrete planter, sustaining severe injuries, including a fractured orbital bone, lacerations, and nerve damage.

Key Allegations Against Royal Caribbean

The lawsuit accuses Royal Caribbean of negligence, alleging that the cruise line:

1. Failed to Maintain the Open Deck in a Safe Condition – The complaint states that Royal Caribbean was aware that open deck areas become wet from rain, pool water, or cleaning activities, yet it failed to ensure that the walking surface remained safe for passengers.
2. Failed to Warn Passengers About Wet Floor Hazards – The plaintiff claims that no caution signs, cones, or barriers were placed near the Central Park area, despite the known risk of water accumulation.
3. Negligent Training and Supervision of Crew Members – The lawsuit argues that Royal Caribbean failed to properly train its crew members on how to manage and prevent hazardous conditions caused by watering planters and deck cleaning.
4. Failed to Address Prior Similar Incidents – The complaint cites multiple previous lawsuits involving passengers slipping on wet decks near the Central Park area aboard Royal Caribbean vessels, demonstrating that the cruise line had prior knowledge of the hazard but failed to take corrective action.

Prior Slip-and-Fall Incidents Cited in the Lawsuit

The complaint lists several prior cases where passengers slipped on wet deck surfaces aboard Royal Caribbean ships, including:

• Amy Selwood v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:20-cv-24513) – Passenger slipped on a wet deck in the Central Park area aboard Symphony of the Seas in January 2020.
• Randi Sorenson v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:22-cv-22188) – Passenger slipped on a wet deck near planters in the Central Park area aboard Symphony of the Seas in March 2022.
• Gisela Castro v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:24-cv-23146) – Passenger slipped on a wet floor near Jamie’s Italian Restaurant on Harmony of the Seas in August 2023.
• Troy Wallace v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:23-cv-20265-KMM) – Passenger slipped on a wet open deck aboard Odyssey of the Seas in January 2022.

The lawsuit alleges that these prior incidents should have put Royal Caribbean on notice of the danger, yet the cruise line failed to implement proper safety measures.

Legal Implications for Cruise Ship Passenger Safety

This case raises serious legal questions about Royal Caribbean’s responsibility to maintain safe walking surfaces aboard its vessels, including:

• Should cruise lines be required to implement stricter deck maintenance protocols to prevent water accumulation?
• Is Royal Caribbean liable for failing to place warning signs in known wet deck areas?
• Does the cruise line’s history of prior slip-and-fall incidents establish negligence?
• What duty does Royal Caribbean have to ensure that crew members are properly trained to manage water hazards?

What’s Next?

The case will likely focus on:

• Whether Royal Caribbean was aware of the dangerous condition and failed to take corrective action.
• If the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers directly contributed to Broussard’s injuries.
• Whether Royal Caribbean’s maintenance and cleaning protocols meet industry safety standards.
• Will Royal Caribbean argue that Broussard should have been more careful, or will this case expose systemic safety failures aboard Harmony of the Seas?

Texas Passenger Sues Royal Caribbean Over Slip-and-Fall in Windjammer Café Aboard Freedom of the Seas

A Texas resident has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., alleging that she suffered severe injuries after slipping on a wet floor in the Windjammer Café aboard Freedom of the Seas. The case, Lynne Baltzer v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 1:25-cv-20883-DSL), raises concerns about slip-and-fall hazards in cruise ship buffet areas, negligent maintenance, and Royal Caribbean’s failure to warn passengers of dangerous conditions.

Background of the Case

On May 9, 2024, Lynne Baltzer was exiting the Windjammer Café on Deck 11 of the Freedom of the Seas while carrying a plate of food when she suddenly slipped on an unmarked wet area on the floor, leading to a serious fall.

According to the complaint:

• The wet area was not visibly apparent, posing a hidden slipping hazard for passengers.
• No caution signs or warnings were present, despite the high-traffic nature of the area.
• The Plaintiff was carrying food, making it difficult for her to notice or anticipate the wet condition on the floor.
• After the fall, she was diagnosed with a fractured tibia, a fractured fibula, and a dislocated ankle.

Key Allegations Against Royal Caribbean

The lawsuit accuses Royal Caribbean of negligence, including:

1. Failure to Maintain the Windjammer Café in a Safe Condition – The complaint claims that Royal Caribbean knew or should have known that buffet areas are prone to water or food spills but failed to ensure that the floor was dry and safe for passengers.
2. Failure to Warn Passengers of the Hazard – The plaintiff alleges that Royal Caribbean failed to place caution signs or warn passengers of the slipping hazard, despite the known risks of wet surfaces in buffet areas.
3. Failure to Address Prior Similar Incidents – The lawsuit cites prior slip-and-fall incidents involving wet floors in Windjammer Cafés aboard multiple Royal Caribbean ships, demonstrating that the cruise line was aware of the danger but failed to take preventive action.
4. Negligent Maintenance Practices – The complaint asserts that Royal Caribbean failed to implement adequate floor maintenance and cleaning procedures to prevent slip-and-fall accidents.

Prior Slip-and-Fall Incidents in Windjammer Cafés

The lawsuit lists several prior cases where passengers slipped on wet floors in Royal Caribbean’s Windjammer Café, including:

• Silva v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:24-cv-20866) – Passenger slipped and fell on a wet floor in the Windjammer Café aboard Radiance of the Seas in March 2023.
• Cuaresma v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:24-cv-23204) – Passenger slipped on a wet floor in the Windjammer Café aboard Oasis of the Seas in September 2023.
• Burns v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:24-cv-21326) – Passenger slipped on a wet floor in the Windjammer Café aboard Navigator of the Seas in April 2023.
• Lu v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 1:23-cv-24725) – Passenger slipped on a wet floor in the Windjammer Café aboard Explorer of the Seas in December 2022.

The lawsuit argues that these prior incidents should have put Royal Caribbean on notice of the slipping hazards, yet the cruise line failed to improve safety measures.

Legal Implications for Cruise Ship Passenger Safety

This case raises serious legal questions about Royal Caribbean’s responsibility to maintain safe walking surfaces aboard its vessels, including:

• Should cruise lines implement stricter maintenance and inspection protocols for buffet areas prone to spills?
• Is Royal Caribbean liable for failing to place warning signs in areas known to become wet?
• Does the cruise line’s history of prior slip-and-fall incidents establish negligence?
• What duty does Royal Caribbean have to ensure that buffet areas remain safe for passengers carrying food and beverages?

What’s Next?

The case will likely focus on:

• Whether Royal Caribbean was aware of the dangerous condition and failed to take corrective action.
• If the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers directly contributed to Baltzer’s injuries.
• Whether Royal Caribbean’s maintenance and cleaning protocols meet industry safety standards.
• Will Royal Caribbean argue that Baltzer should have been more careful, or will this case expose systemic safety failures in Windjammer Cafés across its fleet?

Florida Passenger Sues Royal Caribbean Over Slip-and-Fall on Wet Pool Deck Aboard Wonder of the Seas

A Florida resident has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., alleging that he suffered severe injuries after slipping on a wet surface near the Solarium area aboard Wonder of the Seas. The case, Spencer Hehl v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 1:25-cv-20878-AHS), raises significant concerns about slip-and-fall hazards on cruise ship pool decks, Royal Caribbean’s alleged negligence, and the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers of known dangers.

Background of the Case

On October 28, 2023, Spencer Hehl, a fare-paying passenger, was walking through the Solarium area on Deck 15 aboard Wonder of the Seas when he slipped on a wet and slippery puddle near the pool deck stairs.

According to the complaint:

• The wet area was difficult to detect, creating a hidden hazard for passengers.
• The pool deck stairs lacked proper drainage, allowing water to accumulate.
• No warning signs, caution markers, or barriers were placed near the hazardous area.
• As a result of the fall, Hehl suffered a torn labrum, severe pain, and permanent impairment.

Key Allegations Against Royal Caribbean

The lawsuit accuses Royal Caribbean of negligence, alleging that the cruise line:

1. Failed to Maintain the Pool Deck in a Safe Condition – The plaintiff claims that Royal Caribbean knew or should have known that pool deck surfaces become wet and slippery but failed to take appropriate safety measures.
2. Failed to Warn Passengers About the Hazard – The complaint states that no caution signs were placed near the wet stairs, despite the known risk of water accumulation in pool areas.
3. Negligent Maintenance and Design of the Pool Deck – The lawsuit argues that the deck’s surface was unreasonably slippery when wet, and that Royal Caribbean failed to correct the issue despite prior incidents.
4. Failure to Address Previous Slip-and-Fall Incidents – The complaint references several prior lawsuits involving passengers slipping on wet pool decks aboard Royal Caribbean ships, indicating that the cruise line had prior knowledge of the danger but failed to implement safety measures.

Prior Slip-and-Fall Incidents Cited in the Lawsuit

The complaint highlights several prior lawsuits involving slip-and-fall incidents on Royal Caribbean pool decks, including:

• Valenzuela v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 24-cv-23959) – Passenger slipped and fell on a wet spot in the Solarium area aboard Allure of the Seas in October 2023.
• Nappi v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 23-cv-24109) – Passenger suffered injuries after slipping on a wet pool deck near the Solarium on Symphony of the Seas in November 2022.
• Schaub v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 24-cv-20485) – Passenger fell due to a wet surface on the pool deck of Wonder of the Seas in March 2023.
• Lepere v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 24-cv-20219) – Passenger slipped on wet flooring in the Solarium area on Symphony of the Seas in January 2022.
• Morrison v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 23-cv-24862) – Passenger slipped and fell on a wet pool deck on Mariner of the Seas in January 2023.

The lawsuit claims that these prior incidents should have put Royal Caribbean on notice that wet deck surfaces posed a recurring hazard, yet the cruise line failed to take corrective action.

Legal Implications for Cruise Ship Passenger Safety

This case raises serious legal questions about Royal Caribbean’s responsibility to maintain safe walking surfaces aboard its vessels, including:

• Should cruise lines be required to implement stricter safety protocols to prevent water accumulation on pool decks?
• Is Royal Caribbean liable for failing to place warning signs in known wet deck areas?
• Does the cruise line’s history of prior slip-and-fall incidents establish negligence?
• What duty does Royal Caribbean have to ensure pool deck areas are designed with slip-resistant surfaces?

What’s Next?

The case will likely focus on:

• Whether Royal Caribbean had prior knowledge of the hazard and failed to take corrective action.
• If the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers directly contributed to Hehl’s injuries.
• Whether Royal Caribbean’s maintenance and deck design practices meet industry safety standards.
• Will Royal Caribbean argue that Hehl should have been more careful, or will this case expose systemic safety failures aboard Wonder of the Seas?

Ohio Passenger Sues Celebrity Cruises Over Slip-and-Fall on Pool Deck Aboard Celebrity Silhouette

A resident of Ohio has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Celebrity Cruises, Inc., alleging that he suffered serious injuries after slipping on an unreasonably slippery pool deck aboard Celebrity Silhouette. The case, Tom Marshall v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc. (Case No. 1:25-cv-20931-KMM), raises significant concerns about wet deck hazards, cruise line negligence, and the failure to warn passengers of known dangers.

Background of the Case

On April 2, 2024, Tom Marshall, a fare-paying passenger, was walking on Deck 12 near the pool area aboard Celebrity Silhouette when he slipped and fell on a wet and slippery deck surface, suffering severe bodily injuries, including head and neck injuries.

According to the complaint:

• The pool deck surface was excessively slippery, even when dry, creating an unreasonable hazard for passengers.
• The high-gloss enamel paint applied to the deck surface lacked sufficient anti-slip additives, making it dangerously slick when wet.
• The cruise line had recently resurfaced the deck, but failed to include anti-slip properties, further increasing the risk.
• The Plaintiff sustained a traumatic brain injury, memory loss, and neck injuries as a result of the fall.

Key Allegations Against Celebrity Cruises

The lawsuit accuses Celebrity Cruises of negligence, alleging that the cruise line:

1. Failed to Maintain the Pool Deck in a Safe Condition – The plaintiff claims that Celebrity Cruises knew or should have known that the deck was unreasonably slippery and failed to ensure that it was safe for passengers.
2. Failed to Warn Passengers About the Hazard – The complaint states that Celebrity Cruises failed to place warning signs near the pool deck, despite prior knowledge that similar incidents had occurred.
3. Negligent Resurfacing and Maintenance of the Deck – The lawsuit argues that Celebrity Cruises used high-gloss enamel paint without sufficient anti-slip additives, making the surface more hazardous for passengers walking barefoot or with wet feet.
4. Failure to Address Prior Similar Incidents – The complaint references previous lawsuits involving passengers slipping on pool decks aboard Celebrity and Royal Caribbean ships, suggesting that the cruise line was aware of the hazard but failed to take action.

Prior Slip-and-Fall Incidents Cited in the Lawsuit

The complaint highlights several prior lawsuits involving slip-and-fall incidents on pool decks aboard Celebrity and Royal Caribbean ships, including:

• Larowe v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 23-cv-23814-DPG) – Passenger slipped and fell on a similar resurfaced pool deck aboard Symphony of the Seas in October 2022.
• Su v. Royal Caribbean (Case No. 18-cv-20518-FAM) – Passenger slipped on an unreasonably slick pool deck aboard Freedom of the Seas in March 2017.
• Jones v. Celebrity Cruises (Case No. 24-cv-21567-BB) – Passenger suffered injuries after slipping on a wet deck near the pool area on Celebrity Equinox in May 2023.

The lawsuit claims that these prior incidents should have put Celebrity Cruises on notice of the recurring hazard, yet the cruise line failed to implement corrective safety measures.

Legal Implications for Cruise Ship Passenger Safety

This case raises serious legal questions about Celebrity Cruises’ responsibility to maintain safe walking surfaces aboard its vessels, including:

• Should cruise lines be required to implement stricter maintenance protocols for pool decks prone to excessive slipperiness?
• Is Celebrity Cruises liable for failing to place warning signs in known hazardous areas?
• Does the cruise line’s history of prior slip-and-fall incidents establish negligence?
• What duty does Celebrity Cruises have to ensure deck resurfacing includes proper anti-slip properties?

What’s Next?

The case will likely focus on:

• Whether Celebrity Cruises was aware of the hazardous deck condition and failed to take corrective action.
• If the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers directly contributed to Marshall’s injuries.
• Whether Celebrity Cruises’ resurfacing and maintenance practices meet industry safety standards.
• Will Celebrity Cruises argue that Marshall should have been more cautious, or will this case expose systemic safety failures aboard Celebrity Silhouette?

Arkansas Passenger Sues Royal Caribbean Over FlowRider Surfing Simulator Injury Aboard Harmony of the Seas

A resident of Arkansas has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Group, alleging that he suffered severe injuries while using the FlowRider surfing simulator aboard Harmony of the Seas. The case, Jonathan Pope v. Royal Caribbean Group (Case No. 1:25-cv-20950-DPG), raises significant concerns about the safety of cruise ship recreational attractions, design modifications to onboard FlowRiders, and the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers about known hazards.

Background of the Case

On March 21, 2024, Jonathan Pope, a fare-paying passenger, participated in the FlowRider surfing simulator aboard Harmony of the Seas. The FlowRider, an attraction that shoots a thin sheet of water up a sloped surface to simulate a wave, requires participants to ride a board while maintaining balance.

According to the complaint:

• Pope dutifully followed the instructions of the Royal Caribbean crewmember while using the FlowRider.
• He lost control and was propelled forcefully into the side and back walls of the attraction, suffering severe injuries.
• The FlowRider onboard Harmony of the Seas was allegedly modified from its standard design, shortening the ride’s length, which increased the risk of passengers colliding with the back wall.
• Unlike modern FlowRider models, the one installed on Harmony of the Seas did not have adequate safety padding in impact zones.

As a result of the fall, Pope sustained serious physical injuries, including head trauma, spinal injuries, and permanent impairment.

Key Allegations Against Royal Caribbean

The lawsuit accuses Royal Caribbean of negligence, alleging that the cruise line:

1. Failed to Warn Passengers About the Risks of the FlowRider – The plaintiff claims that Royal Caribbean failed to provide adequate warnings about the dangers of colliding with the ride’s back wall.
2. Modified the FlowRider in a Way That Increased Injury Risk – The complaint states that Royal Caribbean altered the attraction’s design by shortening its length, which increased the risk of passengers being thrown into the back wall at high velocity.
3. Failed to Implement Modern Safety Features – The lawsuit asserts that Royal Caribbean failed to upgrade the FlowRider with “Pillow Padding” in the recovery zones, which is a standard safety feature in newer FlowRiders.
4. Negligent Instruction and Supervision by Crew Members – The plaintiff alleges that Royal Caribbean’s instructors did not provide proper guidance or assistance to prevent dangerous falls.
5. Failure to Address Prior FlowRider-Related Injuries – The complaint cites prior passenger injuries involving FlowRider attractions across Royal Caribbean’s fleet, alleging that the cruise line was aware of the danger but failed to implement necessary safety improvements.

Prior FlowRider Injury Lawsuits Cited in the Complaint

The lawsuit references previous lawsuits involving injuries on Royal Caribbean’s FlowRider attractions, including:

• Johnson v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 11-23206-CIV) – Passenger suffered a severe spinal injury after losing control on the FlowRider in 2011.
• Morris v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 20-cv-20788-RNS) – Passenger was thrown into the FlowRider’s back wall and sustained head trauma in 2020.
• Brett v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 17-CV-20151-UU) – Passenger filed suit after suffering a broken leg on the FlowRider in 2017.
• Alkabetz v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 21-CV-20895-RNS) – Passenger suffered a concussion due to impact with the FlowRider’s back wall in 2021.

The lawsuit argues that Royal Caribbean’s knowledge of prior FlowRider-related injuries should have prompted changes to improve passenger safety, yet the cruise line continued to operate the modified attraction without adequate safeguards.

Legal Implications for Cruise Ship Recreational Safety

This case raises critical legal questions about Royal Caribbean’s responsibility to ensure the safety of onboard attractions, including:

• Should cruise lines be required to implement modern safety features on high-risk attractions like FlowRider?
• Is Royal Caribbean liable for modifying the FlowRider’s design in a way that increases injury risk?
• Does the cruise line’s history of FlowRider-related injuries establish negligence?
• What duty does Royal Caribbean have to ensure proper crew training and passenger safety measures?

What’s Next?

The case will likely focus on:

• Whether Royal Caribbean was aware of the FlowRider’s hazards and failed to take corrective action.
• If the cruise line’s failure to install modern safety features directly contributed to Pope’s injuries.
• Whether Royal Caribbean’s crew provided adequate instruction and supervision for FlowRider participants.
• Will Royal Caribbean argue that Pope assumed the risk of injury by using the attraction, or will this case expose systemic safety failures aboard Harmony of the Seas?

Florida Passenger Sues Royal Caribbean Over Wind-Tunnel Effect Injury Aboard Oasis of the Seas

A Florida resident has filed a personal injury lawsuit against Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., alleging that she suffered severe injuries after being forcefully knocked down by a wind-tunnel effect while transitioning from an outdoor deck to an indoor section aboard Oasis of the Seas. The case, Galina Reshetnikova v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 1:25-cv-20961-CMA), raises concerns about cruise ship design flaws, inadequate safety measures, and Royal Caribbean’s failure to address a known recurring hazard.

Background of the Case

On March 23, 2024, Galina Reshetnikova, a fare-paying passenger, was walking from the jogging track on Deck 5 into an indoor section of the ship when a sudden wind-tunnel effect forcefully knocked her into a wall and onto the floor.

According to the complaint:

• The wind-tunnel effect was caused by the ship’s design, where wind pressure builds up and funnels through certain passageways.
• The ship lacked protective wind screens or awnings to deflect airflow and prevent dangerous wind bursts.
• Royal Caribbean was aware of similar prior incidents but failed to implement corrective safety measures.
• Reshetnikova sustained serious injuries, including head trauma, spinal injuries, and a right elbow fracture.

Key Allegations Against Royal Caribbean

The lawsuit accuses Royal Caribbean of negligence, alleging that the cruise line:

1. Failed to Monitor and Correct Wind-Tunnel Hazards – The plaintiff claims that Royal Caribbean knew about dangerous wind conditions on its outdoor decks but failed to monitor or correct them.
2. Failed to Install Safety Measures – The lawsuit asserts that the cruise line did not implement wind screens, barriers, or awnings to minimize the wind flow, despite knowing of previous passenger injuries.
3. Failed to Warn Passengers About the Hazard – The complaint states that there were no warning signs alerting passengers to sudden wind gusts in the transition area, despite the cruise line’s knowledge of the risk.
4. Negligent Maintenance of the Ship’s Exterior – The plaintiff alleges that Royal Caribbean did not properly assess and modify its ship design to prevent wind-tunnel effects, creating an ongoing hazard for passengers.
5. Failure to Address Prior Similar Incidents – The complaint references prior lawsuits involving injuries caused by wind-tunnel effects aboard Royal Caribbean ships, demonstrating that the cruise line was aware of the risk but failed to take action.

Prior Wind-Tunnel Injury Lawsuits Cited in the Complaint

The lawsuit references previous legal claims involving wind-related injuries aboard Royal Caribbean vessels, including:

• Grover v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 1:24-cv-24945-CMA) – Passenger suffered serious injuries after being knocked down by a sudden wind gust aboard Allure of the Seas in 2023.
• Lynch v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (Case No. 1:17-cv-24608-KMW) – Passenger was thrown against a railing due to a wind-tunnel effect on an outdoor deck aboard Symphony of the Seas in 2017.

The lawsuit argues that these prior cases should have put Royal Caribbean on notice that wind-tunnel effects were a known hazard, yet the cruise line failed to implement safety measures.

Legal Implications for Cruise Ship Passenger Safety

This case raises critical legal questions about Royal Caribbean’s responsibility to mitigate known environmental hazards aboard its vessels, including:

• Should cruise lines install protective wind screens or barriers to prevent wind-tunnel effects?
• Is Royal Caribbean liable for failing to warn passengers of dangerous wind conditions?
• Does the cruise line’s history of prior wind-related injuries establish negligence?
• What duty does Royal Caribbean have to assess and modify its ship design for passenger safety?

What’s Next?

The case will likely focus on:

• Whether Royal Caribbean was aware of the wind-tunnel hazard and failed to take corrective action.
• If the cruise line’s failure to warn passengers directly contributed to Reshetnikova’s injuries.
• Whether Royal Caribbean’s ship design and safety measures meet industry standards.
• Will Royal Caribbean argue that Reshetnikova should have exercised more caution, or will this case expose systemic failures in ship safety design?

These lawsuits raise pressing legal questions about whether Royal Caribbean is doing enough to protect its passengers, particularly in high-risk areas like pool decks, buffet stations, ship entrances, and recreational attractions.

• Are cruise lines responsible for ensuring that their pool decks and buffet areas remain dry and slip-resistant?
• Should cruise ship designs be modified to prevent wind-tunnel effects and steep ramps that create unnecessary hazards?
• Did Royal Caribbean modify the FlowRider simulator in a way that made it more dangerous for passengers?

As these cases move through the courts, Royal Caribbean’s safety policies and maintenance procedures will be put under intense scrutiny.Will the cruise line take accountability for these alleged safety failures, or will it defend itself against these claims in court?Stay tuned as Cruise Law Weekly tracks the latest legal battles shaping passenger rights, cruise industry safety regulations, and the future of maritime litigation.