Advertisement

The Maritime Industry and the Peculiarity of Maritime Liens

  • Erik Göretzlehner
Chapter

Abstract

The maritime industry and especially the shipping industry are for many reasons a special case when it comes to insolvency. Not only is the international character of shipping an inherent feature but the mobility of the main assets of most financially struggling shipping companies, the ship itself, presents a further complicating factor for the reorganisation or liquidation under national insolvency laws. This chapter serves to display one of the most salient features of maritime law, the law of maritime securities and in particular that of maritime liens.

References

  1. Athanassopoulou, V. (2005). Schiffsunternehmen und Schiffsüberlassungsverträge. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, H. (2006). The law of marine insurance (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berlingieri, F. (1995). The 1993 Convention on maritime liens and mortgages. Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, (1), 57–76.Google Scholar
  4. Berlingieri, F. (2011). Arrest of ships - A commentary on the 1952 and 1999 Arrest Conventions (5th ed.). London: Informa Law & Finance.Google Scholar
  5. Bowtle, G., & McGuinness, K. (2001). The law of ship mortgages. London: Informa Professional.Google Scholar
  6. Buss, C. (2016). Ship mortgagees: Enforcement and remedies. In B. Soyer & A. Tettenborn (Eds.), Ship building, sale and finance (pp. 149–169). Abingdon: Informa Law from Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Davies, M. (2000/2001). In defense of unpopular virtues: Personification and ratification. Tulane Law Review, 75, 337–410.Google Scholar
  8. Davies, M. (2016). Cross-border insolvency and admiralty: A middle path of reciprocal comity. CMI Year Book, 2015, 196–215.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, M., & Dickey, A. (2004). Shipping law (3rd ed.). Prymont: Lawbook Co.Google Scholar
  10. Davies, M., & Lewins, K. (2002). Foreign maritime liens: Should they be recognised in Australian Courts? The Australian Law Journal, 76, 775–784.Google Scholar
  11. de la Pedraja, R. (1992). The rise & decline of U.S. merchant shipping in the twentieth century. New York: Twayne.Google Scholar
  12. Derrington, S., & Turner, J. (2007). The law and practice of admiralty matter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Donovan, C. (1992). Arrest and attachment in admiralty. University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal, 5, 127–154.Google Scholar
  14. Donovan, C. (2001/2002). Picking the shipowner’s poison - choice-of-law clauses and maritime liens. University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal, 14, 185–201.Google Scholar
  15. Drobnig, U. (1991). Vorschlag einer besonderen sachenrechtlichen Kollisionsnorm für Transportmittel. In D. Henrich (Ed.), Vorschläge und Gutachten zur Reform des deutschen internationalen Sachen- und Immaterialgüterrechts (pp. 13–36). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  16. Force, R., Yiannopoulos, A. N., & Davies, M. (2008). Admiralty and maritime law (Vol. II). Washington, DC: Beard Books.Google Scholar
  17. French, L. (2006). In S. Harwood (Ed.), Shipping finance (3rd ed.). London: Euromoney Books.Google Scholar
  18. Grädler, T., & Zintl, J. (2013). Die Schiffshypothek. Recht der Transportwirtschaft, 95–99.Google Scholar
  19. Harlaftis, G., & Theotokas, I. (2010). Maritime business during the twentieth century: Continuity and change. In C. Grammenos (Ed.), The handbook of maritime economics and business (2nd ed., pp. 3–33). London: Lloyd’s List.Google Scholar
  20. Harrison, T. (2011). Legal issues in bunkering - An introduction to the law relating to the sale and use of marine fuel. Adderbury: Petrospot Limited.Google Scholar
  21. Hartley, S. (1981). How to secure a maritime lien. London: Lampert & Selway Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Hayden, R., & Leland, K. (2005). The uniqueness of admiralty and maritime law: The unique nature of maritime liens. Tulane Law Review, 79, 1227–1257.Google Scholar
  23. Heinz, N. (2011). Das Vollmachtsstatut - Eine einheitliche Kollisionsnorm für Europa. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  24. Heiss, H., & Trümper, T.-N. (2015). In R. Beckmann & A. Matusche-Beckmann (Eds.), Versicherungsrechts-Handbuch (3rd ed.). München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  25. Herber, R. (1999). Die wundersame Wiederauferstehung der Schiffsgläubigerrechte für Landungsschäden und Kapitänsgeschäfte. Transportrecht, 294–295.Google Scholar
  26. Herber, R. (2016). Seehandelsrecht- Systematische Darstellung (2nd ed.). Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  27. Jackson, D. (1981). Foreign maritime liens in English courts - Principle and policy. Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, (3), 335–340.Google Scholar
  28. Jackson, D. (2005). Enforcement of maritime claims (4th ed.). London: Informa Law.Google Scholar
  29. Krohn, M. (2004). Die Pfandrechte an registrierten Schiffen. Frankfurt am Main: Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  30. Krüger, W., & Rauscher, T. (Eds.). (2016). Münchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung (Vol. 2, 5th ed.). München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  31. Letalik, N. (2012). Forum shopping comes to Canada: The recognition of foreign maritime liens. In A. Chircop, N. Letalik, T. McDorman, & S. Rolston (Eds.), The regulation of international shipping: International and comparative perspectives (pp. 525–539). Leiden: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  32. Lind, D. (2010). Pragmatism and anthropomorphism: Reconceiving the doctrine of the personality of the ship. University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal, 22, 39–121.Google Scholar
  33. Mandaraka- Sheppard, A. (2009). Modern maritime law and risk management (2nd ed.). London: Informa Law.Google Scholar
  34. Mandaraka-Sheppard, A. (2013). Modern maritime law - Volume 2: Managing risks and liabilities (3rd ed.). Oxford: Informa Law.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mankowski, P. (1990). Das Statut der Schiffsgläubigerrechte. Transportrecht, 213–228.Google Scholar
  36. McCabe, A. (2012). Demosthenes and the origins of the maritime lien. Journal of Maritime Law & Commerce, 43, 581–591.Google Scholar
  37. McCullough, R. (2007/2008). Law Wars: The battle between bankruptcy and admiralty. Tulane Maritime Law Journal, 32, 457–491.Google Scholar
  38. McDonald, E. (2000). An overview of maritime liens and their priorities in the United States. Lloyd’s Shipping and Nautical Year Book 2000, 28–38.Google Scholar
  39. Nikaki, T. (2016). Financing newbuilding vessels and Barecon 2001: A fair deal? In B. Soyer & A. Tettenborn (Eds.), Ship building, sale and finance (pp. 212–240). Abingdon: Informa Law from Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Peck, S. (2013). Navigating the Murky waters of admiralty and bankruptcy law. Tulane Law Review, 87, 955–994.Google Scholar
  41. Puttfarken, H.-J. (1998). Neues vom Schiffsgläubigerrecht. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, 62, 787–814.Google Scholar
  42. Rabe, D. (2000). Seehandelsrecht (4th ed.). München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  43. Reddie, J. (1841 (Reprint 2005)). An historical view of the law of maritime commerce. Edinburgh: William Blackwood and Sons.Google Scholar
  44. Rose, F. (2003). The action In Rem in English Law. In E. van Hooydonk (Ed.), English and continental maritime law - after 115 years of maritime law unification: A search for differences between common law and civil law (pp. 45–60). Antwerpen-Apeldoorn: Maklu.Google Scholar
  45. Rose, F. (2004). Marine insurance - law and practice. London: Informa Professional.Google Scholar
  46. Rose, F. (2005). General average - law and practice (2nd ed.). London: Informa Law from Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Ruangsilp, B. (2007). Dutch East India Company merchants at the Court of Ayutthaya - Dutch perceptions of the Thai Kingdom c. 1604–1765. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  48. Schmidt, K. (Ed.). (2014). Münchener Kommentar zum Handelsgesetzbuch (Vol. 7, 3rd ed.). München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  49. Schmidt-Vollmer, B. (2003). Schiffsgläubigerrechte und ihre Geltendmachung - Eine rechtsvergleichende Darstellung unter Berücksichtigung des deutschen, englischen, US-amerikanischen und niederländischen Rechts. Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  50. Schoenbaum, T. (2011). Admiralty and maritime law (Vol. I, 5th ed.). St. Paul: West/Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
  51. Spruyt, J. (1994). Ship management (2nd ed.). London: Lloyd’s of London Press.Google Scholar
  52. Stopford, M. (2009). Maritime economics (3rd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Syriopoulos, T. (2010). Shipping finance and international capital markets. In C. Grammenos (Ed.), The handbook of maritime economics and business (2nd ed., pp. 811–849). London: Lloyd’s List.Google Scholar
  54. Tetley, W. (1994a). International conflicts of laws - common, civil and maritime. Montreal: International Shipping Publications.Google Scholar
  55. Tetley, W. (1994b). The general maritime law - the Lex Maritima. Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce, 20, 105–145.Google Scholar
  56. Tetley, W., & Wilkins, R. (1998). Maritime liens and claims (2nd ed.). Montreal: International Shipping Publications.Google Scholar
  57. Thomas, D. R. (1980). Maritime liens. London: Stevenson & Sons.Google Scholar
  58. Tiedemann, S. (1995). Die Haftung aus Vermögensübernahme im internationalen Recht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  59. UNCTAD. (2015). Review of maritime transport. New York.Google Scholar
  60. van de Biezenbos, K. (2015). A sea change in creditor priorities. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 48, 595–640.Google Scholar
  61. Weil, D. (1996). Charting a course through dangerous waters: A Landlubber’s introduction to the rules of maritime indebtedness in the context of a maritime bankruptcy. University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal, 9, 195–223.Google Scholar
  62. Wild, A. (1999). The East India Company: Trade and conquest from 1600. London: Harper Collins Illustrated.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erik Göretzlehner
    • 1
  1. 1.Frankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations