Well the attachment only showed page 1 of 3 so I don’t have the whole document.
If the article is accurate and they waive liability for Oceans Gate’s “negligence” then it does not expressly waive claims for gross negligence, or recklessness. Under the circumstances, they can easily be facing gross negligence or recklessness claims. An attorney should have no problem alleging facts to support those claims.
I do not know if there is a choice of law provision in there, but under maritime law, generally speaking the law of the flag country of the vessel controls. This was a Bahamian company and I’m assuming the vessel was flagged there so Bahamian law should govern, not US law. I couldn’t begin to tell you anything about Bahamian law but I am assuming it tends to be more favorable for ship owners.
There is a reason none of our major cruise lines are US flagged ships, because US maritime laws are very plaintiff friendly.
TLDR: it sounds like the waivers are not as “ironclad” as some believe and I expect this will end with settlements and not summary judgment for Oceans Gate.