Maritime Law-What you need to know about the MLC

Given my work on the subject, the Professional Mariner magazine had me guest blog an article on the Maritime Labor Convention ("MLC"). It was incidentally posted on August 20, 2013, the implementation date for the MLC. You can find the complete article here => Professional Mariner Magazine.

I continue to be barraged by questions related to applicability of the MLC in given scenarios. The answer is simple, the MLC will apply to ships of all tonnages, whether publicly or privately owned, which are “ordinarily engaged in commercial activities.” The MLC does not provide a definition for what constitutes this quoted language and there has been some debate in yachting circles as to whether yachts are included. Some flag states have been publishing their narrow interpretation of this language as a way to encourage these vessel owners to change flags. However, this interpretation is not an answer to the “no more favorable treatment” clause which is a principle of the MLC.

So in other words, when port states which have ratified the MLC verify foreign ships’ compliance with the MLC in their ports, the intended system of port state enforcement will allow those ships carrying the MLC Certificate issued by its flag state to avoid inspection, whereas those that do not will be subject to inspection, resulting in possible delays. If the flag state of the vessel is one which has issued a narrow interpretation of the "ordinarily engaged in commercial activities" language, this may cause detention issues. I am not saying that it will. What I am saying is that given the policy of the MLC of “no more favorable treatment” to ensure that ship owners are not able to evade minimum obligations to their seafarers by failing to implement MLC under a non-ratifying flag state, if port state control believe that the vessel is ordinarily engaged in commercial activities, it will be in violation of MLC.

If you are interested in contacting me, please feel free to do so at mov@chaloslaw.com.

Comments

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector. The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl

Maritime Law--U.S. Crewmember Required to Arbitrate Claims Applying Norwegian Law

In Alberts v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd ., No. 15-14775 (11th Cir. Aug. 23, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a U.S. citizen, working aboard a Royal Caribbean cruise ship is required to arbitrate his claims against Royal Caribbean. Plaintiff, a United States citizen, worked as the lead trumpeter on a passenger Royal Caribbean cruise ship. The ship is a Bahamian flagged vessel with a home port in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Royal Caribbean, the operator of the vessel, is a Liberian corporation with its principal place of business in Florida. After plaintiff became ill while working for Royal Caribbean, he filed suit alleging unseaworthiness, negligence, negligence under the Jones Act, maintenance and cure, and seaman’s wages and penalties. Royal Caribbean moved to compel arbitration, and the district court granted the motion. This appeal presented an issue of first impression: Whether a seaman’s work in international waters on a cruise ship

Maritime Law--Jury Hits Royal Caribbean Cruises With $20.3M Verdict for Officer's Hand Injury

In Spearman v. Royal Caribbean Cruises , Case No. 2011-023730-CA-01, a Miami-Dade County, Florida jury has awarded $20.3 million to a former crewmember of Royal Caribbean Cruises, whose hand was crushed while coming to the aid of a fellow worker during an emergency test in 2008. After a three-week trial, the jury found the Miami-based cruise company negligent in operating an unseaworthy ship and 100 percent liable for the injuries suffered by Lisa Spearman, who was working an officer on Royal Caribbean’s Voyager of the Seas . Spearman sued the company in 2011, three years after her right hand was caught in a watertight power door during a fire-safety drill. According to her lawyers, Spearman was trying to prevent the door from closing on the ship’s nurse when her hand was pulled into a recess pocket of the sliding door and crushed. The nurse allegedly breached the company’s safety protocol when she stumbled through the door, prompting the response from Spearman. Accordin

Miami Shipping Law

Search This Blog