Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre Palais de Justice
179/191, Avenue Joliot Curie, 92 020 Nanterre Cedex, France

Via fax and mail +33 1 40 97 13 63
May 25, 2005

Affaire: M/V Estonia

N°: RG 0412238, RG 0311275

Re: Urgent concerns about the handling of the M/V Estonia case being heard in the court of Nanterre against Bureau Veritas and Jos L Meyer Werft Gmbh on May 30, 2005

Dear Judge Godard,

As you are the judge handling the case concerning the sinking of the Baltic ferry M/V Estonia in the Court of Nanterre, there are several concerns that urgently need to be brought to your attention.

My name is Helje Kaskel, and I am writing to you as the Chairman of the Estonia Litigation Association, which is the international victims' group founded in June 2002 to hasten the resolution of the Estonia disaster, the legal case which you are handling.

First and foremost, why has this case, which was started in September 1996, failed to make any progress?

This case has languished in a legal quagmire for years. To this day, almost 9 years later, the essence of the case has yet to be heard in the Court of Nanterre. I urge you to remember the families of the 852 innocent victims who perished in the frigid waters of the Baltic Sea in September 1994, and the 137 survivors who also suffered horribly in this disaster. To this day, no one has been held accountable for the worst maritime disaster in Europe since WW II.

Since November 23, 2003 when the case was "re-activated", the parties have met only on one occasion. Our attorney, Erik Schmill, says that five court dates were postponed until the hearing of February 14, 2005 took place. Which party requested these delays? In normal circumstances, parties employing such delaying tactics could be held in "contempt of court."

Every time the plaintiffs have overcome an obstacle, another roadblock has been rolled in their way. As if the situation in the court has not been frustrating enough, our attorney, Mr. Schmill, representing us has given us no clear picture on what is really going on with the case in Paris. I am dedicated to bringing transparency and answers to my friends and associates who lost their loved ones in this frightful tragedy and to the survivors of this disaster, who are also victims.

It's been a year since the Estonian law firm of Tehver and Partners asked Erik Schmill, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs, to create a basic contract that would clarify the lawyer's fees and obligations to the plaintiffs, possible outcomes, and the costs and benefits of being a member of the process.

Mr. Schmill has refused to respond to the Estonian lawyers' suggestions. To this day no binding documents except the power-of-attorney exist. Further to his lack of communication with us, as his clients, Mr. Schmill has also told us that we can not change lawyers. Is this really true? Can the court clarify and assist us with this?

As the case has been dragging on for years, it seems perfectly reasonable for the plaintiffs to demand a clearer understanding of the handling of the case and its circumstances before they decide whether it is worthwhile to proceed with it. Most litigation members are very keen to see that serious efforts are made in order to find out the truth about the causes of the disaster and to get compensation from those found responsible.

Surely, some things are done differently in France but it is hard to imagine that it is proper for French lawyers not to communicate with their clients. After all it should be a lawyer's obligation to keep the clients informed, saving the relatives from having to make endless efforts to obtain information from their lawyer.

Honorable Judge Godard, this is an enormous case which is being closely followed around the world. If justice is to be served, it's time to demand to see the new evidence of the sinking of Estonia. You have been given the opportunity to make a substantive contribution to the families of the victims. It is an opportunity to determine what caused the tragic sinking of Estonia. You should take this chance and obtain a proper forensic examination of the whole crime scene.

On behalf of the 1200 litigation members, I hope you will do everything possible to move this case forward and to insure that we, the plaintiffs, receive proper and professional representation from our lawyers which to date we have not received. This will help to resolve this tragic case in a way that takes into consideration the long years of suffering the victim's families have endured.

Thank you very much.

Respectfully submitted,

Helje Kaskel,
Chairman
Estonia Litigation Association