Who Picks Up the Bill When Rockets Rain Down?
Firefly Alpha Explosion (Image Courtesy of Glenn Beltz)
“Rocket science is tough, and rockets have a way of failing”
By now, if you haven’t caught the viral videos of that fireball blazing across European skies or the dramatic “rapid unscheduled disassembly” in the Caribbean, well, welcome to the new Space Age! With commercial spaceflight booming and orbital launches happening almost weekly, rocket remnants are turning up in increasingly unexpected places—from private property in Poland to unsuspecting beaches in Turks & Caicos.
As these cosmic leftovers crash onto private property with growing frequency, an important question emerges: who’s responsible for cleaning up—and more importantly, paying up—if rocket debris lands on your lawn? Well in this post, I will walk through one such real-world hypothetical to explore how the claim process might work.
DISCLAIMER: This analysis reflects my understanding of how the Liability Convention works and should not be taken as legal advice. It's simply a thought exercise to help map out who might be responsible when space hardware makes an unplanned visit to Earth.
Meet the Liability Convention
Starting with the background, fortunately, there’s an international treaty designated specifically for these incidents: the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, better known as the Liability Convention. Adopted in 1972, this treaty creates a framework for handling damages caused by objects launched into Outer Space.
A Brief History
During the early days of the first Space Race, both the Soviet Union and the United States recognized a critical gap in international law: if space-related objects caused damage, who would be responsible? While the foundational Outer Space Treaty established broad principles of liability, it lacked specific mechanisms for resolving claims.
Concerned about potential diplomatic tensions from space-related incidents, the international community—led by the United States and Soviet Union with support from Hungary, India, and Austria—spent nearly a decade developing the Liability Convention to provide clear procedures for resolving such disputes.
Key Principles
While the Liability Convention can be discussed in detail over a long law review article (which coincidentally, I have done so here :)), for the purposes of this discussion, this treaty contains several important provisions that apply directly to the cases of rocket debris landing on Earth.
Launching State
The entity responsible for the damage is the "Launching State," defined as:
The country that launches the object
The country whose territory or facility was used for the launch
The country that procured the launch
If multiple parties qualify as "Launching States," all could be jointly liable.
Absolute Liability Standard
For space debris that lands on Earth or crashes into aircraft in flight, the Launching State is absolutely liable for any damage incurred. The only exception is if the Launching State can prove the damage resulted from gross negligence or intentional acts by the injured party. Otherwise, the principle is simple: if you launched it, you're responsible for any damage it causes back on Earth.
State-to-State Claims Process
Individuals or companies cannot sue Launching States directly under the Convention. They must rely on their own government to file a claim through diplomatic channels. However, the treaty doesn't prevent injured parties from pursuing domestic remedies where available.
Compensable Damages
The Liability Convention covers:
Loss of life or personal injury
Other health impairments (medical costs, long-term care, and etc.)
Loss of or damage to property
The goal of the compensation is to make the injured party whole and according to “principles of justice and equity.” Thus, compensable damages typically include direct damages, though opinions vary on whether all forms of indirect damage are recoverable.
Resolution Process
Claims typically begin with diplomatic negotiations. If parties can't reach a settlement within a year, they can convene a Claims Commission—effectively an arbitration panel—to decide the case. This Commission consists of a member designated by each party and a jointly-agreed third member. While the Commission establishes its own procedures, its decisions are only recommendations and aren't legally binding.
Real-World Application: The Cosmos 954 Incident
The Liability Convention has been formally invoked only once so far. In 1978, the Soviet satellite Cosmos 954 crashed, scattering radioactive debris across a remote area of Canada. The Canadian government filed a claim against the Soviet Union under the Convention. Though Canada incurred approximately $14 million Canadian dollars in recovery and cleanup costs, it claimed only the incremental costs of about $6 million Canadian dollars.
Because of the Liability Convention, some of the complexities in resolving this dispute were eliminated. For example, because damage was caused to the surface of the Earth, the absolute liability standard applied and the parties did not need to haggle over whether the Soviet Union breached a certain standard of care.
After several working sessions, the Soviet Union agreed to pay Canada approximately $3 million Canadian dollars. This incident demonstrated the treaty's effectiveness in settling intergovernmental disputes related to damages caused by space debris.
The Polish Farmer vs. SpaceX: A Hypothetical Walkthrough
Now that we have a good understanding of the Liability Convention, let's explore how the treaty might apply to a recent real-world scenario.
Scenario
A piece of SpaceX rocket debris crashed on the land owned by a Polish farmer, Marek Fagasik, in Śliwno, Poland. When interviewed, Mr. Fagasik mentioned that he might be exploring options for compensation while noting that "it's good that it fell in winter and the losses are not that big. In late spring or if it was very wet, even cars would have a hard time getting there. And there would be losses in crops."
The debris was identified as part of a SpaceX rocket used to launch 22 Starlink satellites from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, United States. SpaceX has preliminarily attributed the crash to “a small liquid oxygen leak...which ultimately drove higher than expected vehicle body rates.” The company also stated that “there are no toxic materials present in the debris” and it is “working closely with the government of Poland on recovery and cleanup efforts.”
With these facts in mind, let’s explore how a potential claim might proceed.
Step 1: Determining the "Launching State"
For Mr. Fagasik to pursue compensation under the Liability Convention, we must first identify the responsible Launching State. These could be:
Entity launching the object: SpaceX is regulated by the United States, making the United States a Launching State.
Entity procuring the launch: The Starlink satellites (v2 satellites) were authorized by the United States Federal Communications Commission, again pointing to the United States.
Territory/facility used: The launch occurred from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, United States, once again pointing to the United States.
So, under all of the Liability Convention’s criteria, the United States is the sole Launching State responsible for this incident.
Step 2: Finding Representation
Mr. Fagasik cannot file a claim directly under the Liability Convention. While Mr. Fagasik can pursue domestic remedies, he would need to convince the Polish government to pursue his claim internationally through diplomatic channels under the Liability Convention. Because the identity of the Launching States is known and the full extent of damages appears to be known (by Mr. Fagasik’s quote), Poland must file this claim within one year of the incident or risk the claim expiring because of statute of limitations.
Step 3: Applying "Absolute Liability"
Since the debris crashed on Earth's surface, the absolute liability standard applies. The United States would be automatically responsible for damages without any need to prove fault or negligence. Since the incident resulted from a propellant leak rather than any action by Mr. Fagasik, no gross negligence/intentional misconduct defense against liability would apply for SpaceX/United States.
Step 4: Calculating Damages
Under the Liability Convention, compensation is provided to restore the injured party to its pre-incident state. For Mr. Fagasik, recoverable damages might include:
Land damage: While no crops were planted at the time, any damage to soil affecting future yields should be recoverable.
Restoration costs: Expenses incurred by Mr. Fagasik to clean up debris (though SpaceX's voluntary cleanup efforts might reduce these cost).
Secondary costs: Additional expenses like equipment rental for repairs to damaged property such as fencing.
If Poland pursues this damage claim diplomatically, it would present these damages to the United States under the absolute liability standard, seeking compensation for all reasonable and direct losses resulting from the crash. One thing of note here is that Mr. Fagasik’s quote to the local newspaper could limit his compensation because his quote essentially suggests that the damage was limited: “It's good that it fell in winter and the losses are not that big. . . . In late spring or if it was very wet, even cars would have a hard time getting there. And there would be losses in crops.” So as a practice tip, this is typically why attorneys do not like their clients giving interviews before being prepped.
Step 5: Resolution Process
If Poland invokes the Liability Convention, it would present a compensation claim to the United States through diplomatic channels. The countries would then attempt to negotiate a settlement. If they fail to reach agreement after one year, either party could request the formation of a Claims Commission to adjudicate the claim. This Commission would render a decision that, while not legally binding, would carry significant diplomatic weight.
Step 6: Possible Outcomes
Several outcomes are possible:
Poland declines to bring a claim
Mr. Fagasik would then need to pursue local remedies, if available.
Poland brings a claim under the Liability Convention
The US and Poland reach a diplomatic agreement with the US providing compensation.
If no agreement is reached, a Claims Commission could be formed and would issue a recommendation.
If the US complies the recommendation, Mr. Fagasik receives the recommended compensation.
If the US declines the recommendation, Mr. Fagasik might pursue local remedies or ask Poland to apply diplomatic pressure.
Looking Skyward: The Future of Space Liability
As commercial space activities accelerate, incidents involving space debris will likely become more common. The Liability Convention provides a framework for resolving these disputes, but the process relies heavily on diplomatic channels rather than direct action by affected individuals.
For someone like Mr. Fagasik, receiving compensation ultimately depends on his government's willingness to pursue a formal claim against the responsible Launching State. While this diplomatic process may seem tedious compared to traditional legal remedies, it represents the current international approach to liability for space-related incidents.
As private launches continue to increase, we may see the Liability Convention being invoked more—or perhaps even revisions to the treaty itself to better address the realities of our increasingly crowded orbital highways and the inevitable returns to Earth that follow.
Resources
Autonomizing Outer Space: Updating the Liability Convention for the Rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI): https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4n97x3hs#main
The Five Core United Nations Treaties related to Outer Space: https://alexsli.com/thespacebar/2017/11/26/the-five-core-un-treaties-related-to-outer-space
Liability Convention: https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/liability-convention.html
Starlink Mission Update: https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=sl-11-4
