Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 258 views

    Barsabal, Rizel C. - Lauritzen vs. Larsen

    Uploaded by

    Denz Christian Resentes
    The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a case where a Danish seaman, Larsen, was injured aboard a Danish ship owned by a Danish citizen, Lauritzen, while in Cuban waters. Larsen filed a lawsuit in a US court under the Jones Act, a US law protecting seamen. The lower courts ruled in Larsen's favor. The Supreme Court held that Danish law, not the Jones Act, should apply. It cited principles of maritime law that the law of the flag state (Denmark) supersedes territorial principles. Applying the Jones Act would also conflict with Danish law and policy. None of the connections to the US - Larsen signing papers in NY, the contract made in NY,

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Barsabal, Rizel C. - Lauritzen vs. Larsen

    Uploaded by

    Denz Christian Resentes
    258 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a case where a Danish seaman, Larsen, was injured aboard a Danish ship owned by a Danish citizen, Lauritzen, while in Cuban waters. Larsen filed a lawsuit in a US court under the Jones Act, a US law protecting seamen. The lower courts ruled in Larsen's favor. The Supreme Court held that Danish law, not the Jones Act, should apply. It cited principles of maritime law that the law of the flag state (Denmark) supersedes territorial principles. Applying the Jones Act would also conflict with Danish law and policy. None of the connections to the US - Larsen signing papers in NY, the contract made in NY,

    Original Title

    Barsabal, Rizel C.- Lauritzen Vs. Larsen

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a case where a Danish seaman, Larsen, was injured aboard a Danish ship owned by a Danish citizen, Lauritzen, while in Cuban waters. Larsen filed a lawsuit in a US court under the Jones Act, a US law protecting seamen. The lower courts ruled in Larsen's favor. The Supreme Court held that Danish law, not the Jones Act, should apply. It cited principles of maritime law that the law of the flag state (Denmark) supersedes territorial principles. Applying the Jones Act would also conflict with Danish law and policy. None of the connections to the US - Larsen signing papers in NY, the contract made in NY,

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    258 views2 pages

    Barsabal, Rizel C. - Lauritzen vs. Larsen

    Uploaded by

    Denz Christian Resentes
    The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a case where a Danish seaman, Larsen, was injured aboard a Danish ship owned by a Danish citizen, Lauritzen, while in Cuban waters. Larsen filed a lawsuit in a US court under the Jones Act, a US law protecting seamen. The lower courts ruled in Larsen's favor. The Supreme Court held that Danish law, not the Jones Act, should apply. It cited principles of maritime law that the law of the flag state (Denmark) supersedes territorial principles. Applying the Jones Act would also conflict with Danish law and policy. None of the connections to the US - Larsen signing papers in NY, the contract made in NY,

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    BARSABAL RIZEL C.

    Lauritzen v. Larsen

    Facts: While temporarily in New York, Larsen (plaintiff), a Danish seaman, signed documents to
    join the crew of the Randa, a Danish ship. The Randa was owned by Lauritzen (defendant), a
    Danish citizen. The documents that Larsen signed provided that any injury sustained aboard
    would be governed by Danish law as well as Lauritzen’s contract with the Danish Seamen’s
    Union, of which Larsen was a member. While the Randa was in Cuban waters, Larsen was
    injured aboard. Larsen filed suit in federal district court in New York under the Jones Act, a
    United States law that protected seamen who suffer personal injury during a voyage. Lauritzen
    argued that Larsen had already received all compensation available under Danish law. Larsen
    argued that Lauritzen’s business with the United States served as a legitimate basis for the
    court’s jurisdiction over the dispute. The district court agreed and issued a judgment against
    Lauritzen. Lauritzen appealed. The court of appeals affirmed. The United States Supreme Court
    granted certiorari to review.

    Issue: Whether the Danish Law or the US Law shall apply in claiming damages?

    Held: The Danish Law shall Apply.

    Law of the Flag- Each state under international law may determine for itself the conditions on
    which it will grant its nationality to a merchant ship, thereby accepting responsibility for it and
    acquiring authority over it. Nationality is evidenced to the world by the ship’s papers and its flag.
    Law of the flag supersedes the territorial principle (even for criminal jurisdiction of personnel of
    a merchant ship), because it is deemed to be a part of the territory of that sovereignty (whose flag
    it flies), and not to lose that character when in navigable waters within the territorial limits of
    another sovereignty.  All matters of discipline and all things done on board which affected only
    the vessel or those belonging to it, and do not involve the peace or dignity of the country or the
    port’s tranquility, should be left by the local government to be dealt with by the authorities of the
    nation to which the vessel belongs as the laws of that nation or the interests of its commerce
    requires.

    Also, allowance of an additional remedy under the Jones Act would conflict sharply with the
    policy and letter of Danish law. By usage as old as the Nation, shipping laws of the United States
    written in all-inclusive general terms have been construed to apply only to areas and transactions
    in which American law would be considered operative under prevalent doctrines of international
    law. The locality test affords no support for the application of American law in this case, since
    the injury occurred on a Danish ship in Cuban waters. The seaman's presence in New York was
    transitory, and created no such national interest in, or duty toward, him as to justify application
    of the Jones Act.  The utmost liberality in disregarding the formality of a ship's registration in a
    country other than that of the allegiance of its owner does not support application of American
    law in this case. That the contract of employment was made in New York does not require a
    different result, since the place of contract is not a substantial influence in the choice between
    competing laws to govern a maritime tort, and the contract itself validly provided for application
    of Danish law. Justice does not require adjudication of this case under American law to save this
    seaman expense and loss of time in returning to a foreign forum. That an American forum has
    perfected its jurisdiction over the parties and that the defendant does frequent and regular
    business in the forum state does not justify application of the law of the forum in this case.

    You might also like