A Florida woman has initiated legal action against Royal Caribbean, alleging negligence after suffering injuries from a fall caused by a parked mobility scooter aboard one of the cruise line’s ships. The lawsuit, filed by Colleen Parson in May, seeks over £75,000 in damages for the injuries sustaining from the incident which occurred while she was on board the Jewel of the Seas on 22 June 2025.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/mobility-scooter-Jewel-of-the-Seas-061026-2825d012adef4025af743a7e6c086fe0.jpg)
According to the amended complaint, Parson states that she was navigating through a busy casino on the ship when an unexpected collision with another passenger led her to trip over a parked mobility scooter. The lawsuit details that the impact with the other passenger caused her to fall, resulting in serious injury—a comminuted intraarticular fracture of the distal radius in her left wrist—requiring subsequent surgical intervention.
In her complaint, Parson accuses Royal Caribbean of failing to maintain safe conditions within the casino and neglecting to warn passengers of potential hazards. She is calling for a trial by jury to pursue compensation for what she describes as “serious personal injury.”
In response to the claims, Royal Caribbean has largely refuted Parson’s allegations, asserting that the situation was “open and obvious,” and that she shares in the responsibility for the incident. The company argues that the hazard posed by the mobility scooter should have been observable to Parson had she been using her senses attentively.
PEOPLE reached out to maritime law experts for their insights on this complex case. Jack Hickey, a trial attorney based in Miami, highlighted the importance of effective crowd control on cruise ships. He expressed that given the confined nature of these environments, particularly in busy areas like casinos, the cruise line has a duty to ensure clear pathways for passengers. This responsibility becomes even more critical during emergencies where safe evacuation routes must be maintained.
Hickey further noted that a key aspect of maritime law involves whether Royal Caribbean was aware of the hazard or should have been aware. He suggested that if evidence shows the scooter had been left unattended for an extended period, it would imply a level of negligence on the part of the cruise line.
Spencer Aronfeld, another maritime legal expert, pointed out that the circumstances surrounding Parson’s fall are made more intricate by her claim that another passenger inadvertently pushed into her. He questioned why she was not also seeking legal recourse against this third party, implying that the choice to sue Royal Caribbean instead could stem from the cruise line being more financially viable for compensation.
Aronfeld explained that jurors will likely ponder the same question during the trial. He suggested that liability could potentially be divided among the parties involved, where the cruise line, the plaintiff, and the other passenger could all bear a portion of the fault.
Ultimately, Aronfeld reiterated that cruise lines have a clear obligation to keep communal areas free from hazards. Should Royal Caribbean be found wanting in this duty, they could be held responsible for Parson’s injuries, even if the accident’s circumstances also implicate other parties.
This case underscores the ongoing debate about accountability on cruise ships and raises questions regarding passenger safety in confined spaces. The outcome of Parson’s lawsuit may provide further clarity on the responsibilities of cruise lines to their passengers, especially regarding the management of potential dangers in shared environments. As proceedings are set to unfold, attention will be keenly focused on the trial and its ramifications for maritime law.