Miami Shipping Law

In the long awaited en banc decision of McBride v. Estes Well Services, LLC , No. 12-30714 (Sept. 25, 2014), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had to decide whether seaman plaintiffs, two injured seamen and the personal representative of a deceased seaman, could recover punitive damages under either the Jones Act or the general maritime law of the United States. The en banc Court affirmed the district court and concluded that the case was controlled by the SCOTUS decision in Miles v. Apex Marine Corp ., which holds that the Jones Act limits a seaman's recovery to pecuniary losses where liability is predicated on the Jones Act or unseaworthiness. Because punitive damages are non-pecuniary losses, punitive damages were not recoverable in the case.       The 73-page decision is interesting, as there are two separate concurring opinions for the 8 judges in the majority and two separate dissenting opinions by 6 judges. Care was taken in this decision...

On June 27, 2014, I had the pleasure of speaking at the Southeastern Admiralty Law Institute ("SEALI") in New Orleans, Louisiana at their Annual Seminar on the topic titled "International Conventions and Their Applicability to U.S. Maritime Cases." My partner in this presentation was Kate Goodsell of Cassidy & Black, P.A. My portion of the presentation focused on how rules of international law are established in the United States, the International Salvage Convention of 1989 and the Maritime Labour Convention. I briefly discuss each of these in turn. International Law as U.S. Law Rules of international law can be established in the United States in three principal ways: (1) by international agreement between countries; (2) international custom; and (3) by derivation of principles common to major world legal systems. Since its inception, the United States has recognized that international legal commitments are binding upon it both internationally and dom...

In this industry, it is generally presumed that arbitration is preferable to litigation. However three recent high-profile arbitral awards highlight the risks of arbitration and demonstrate that, contrary to widespread belief, arbitration is often not cheaper, faster or more predictable than litigation. These three awards, though not strictly maritime in nature, call into question the common practice among corporations of including contractual provisions mandating arbitration in the event of any and every dispute. This is because despite the fact that these decisions are not strictly maritime, the emerging trend in arbitral proceedings also leads to questioning this common practice. As coined by a local judge that will remain nameless, the word "arbitrary" is the root word for the word "arbitration".     In the first case, there were arbitration proceedings that were pending for nearly eight years involving a patent license agreement between th...

A few reports have come out that question recent legal and litigation reform in Latin America. The first comes from Mexico, where 337 mostly foreign-owned sailboats and yachts at 11 marinas around Mexico were impounded. While nearly half of all vessels have been freed, as of earlier this year, over 100 remain impounded, tied up in red tape and confusion in raids that initially seemed aimed at rooting out tax cheats and boat thieves. Mexico's Tax Service Administration, the equivalent to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, said in a statement that "the republic reiterates its commitment to promote legality and support tourism...for the benefit of Mexicans." Many foreigners had to scramble to prove that they were the rightful owners of their vessels, as well as the vessel's legal status in Mexico. In Mexico, boat owners are not required to pay tax or duty if they have a 10-year Temporary Import Permit, which costs around $50.     The second report relates to...

It is generally presumed that big arbitrations generally go to New York or London. However, the case between the Panama Canal Authority ("ACP") and the contractor consortium constructing the Panama Canal known as Grupos Unidos por el Canal ("GUPC") have recently begun preliminary discussions for arbitrating their $1.6 billion dispute regarding alleged cost overruns on the largest infrastructure project in the Western Hemisphere.   Photograph taken from news.nationalgeographic.com  July 31, 2014   Miami's legal community has focused over the past 15 years on developing the expertise and venues to handle arbitration cases, particularly for disputes arising in Latin America. This is especially important, as Miami has the legal expertise, the language capabilities and the cultural experience to handle disputes arising out of Latin America.   The Dispute at Issue   According to previous statements from ACP and GUPC, the disagreement began in...

On August 14, 2014, the Admiralty Law Section, the Federal Litigation Section and the Broward County Chapter of the Federal Bar Association is presenting the seminar "The Costa Concordia: What if this Happened in U.S. Waters?" This seminar will take place at the Riverside Hotel, 620 East Las Olas Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 and will be from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The anticipated Florida CLE credits will be 7.0 hours and Florida Admiralty and Maritime Law Certification Credit will be available. The seminar agenda is impressive and includes the following: Seminar Agenda 8:30 – 8:40 a.m.                   Welcoming Remarks and Introductions                                         ...

In New York Marine & General Ins. v. Continental Cement Co., Case No.13-2313 (8th Cir. July 17, 2014), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has found that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in submitting the uberrimae fidei instruction against the insured. Starr Indemnity filed a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, seeking a determination of its rights and obligations under Continental Cement's insurance policies after MARK TWAIN, a cement barge owned by Continental Cement, sank in the Mississippi River. Continental Cement counterclaimed for breach of contract and vexatious refusal to pay under Missouri law. While conducting its investigation into the loss, Starr Indemnity discovered that a survey had been undertaken of MARK TWAIN in 2008 which indicated that the barge had not been watertight at the time Continental Cement obtained its policies. On the grounds that Continental Ce...