ENGLAND'AND WALES 1
Historical summary 1
The maritime lien-what is it? 2
Who has a maritime lien-ranking for priority 2
A shiprepairer's lien 5
Lack of international consensus produces conflict of laws 5
Problems arising from jurisdictional conflict 5
Need for international uniformity 7
How may a maritime lien be extinguished by lapse of time? 7
Statutory rights “in rem” 9
Types of claim which give the claimant a right “in rem” 10
Time-barring of statutory rights “in rem” 12
A writ “in rem” and a warrant ofarrest contrasted 12
When do liens and statutory rights “in rem” respectively come into being? 13
Actions “in rem” distinguished from actions “in personam” 14
What is beneficial ownership? 15
The right to arrest an alternative ship 16
Is it possible to arrest the same ship twice? 19
What happens when there is a pre-existing contractual forum (or more convenient forum) different from the forum where arrest takes place? 21
Staying proceedings in favour of arbitration 23
What happens to security obtained as a result ofarrest action? 24
Relevance of s.26 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 27
Can “in rem” action be taken against more than one ship? 28
When has “in rem” action been effectively taken? 28
Sovereign immunity 32
Doctrine ofabsolute immunity 32
The Cristina case 32
Changing trends after the Second World War 32
Restricted immunity 33
The State Immunity Act 1978 34
“Mareva”jurisdiction 35
The Mareva injunction analysed 35
Origin ofjurisdiction 37
Mareva injunction clearly distinguished from lien or charge 38
Rights of third parties 38
Mareva injunction not right “in rem” 39
The Siskina case (House of Lords Ruling) 39
The effect ofs.25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 40
Does it matter whether the defendant is based in or out of the jurisdiction? 40
Advantage of Mareva over arrest 41
“Ambulatory” effect 41
The Niedersachsen case- restatement of principles 42
How do you obtain a Mareva injunction? 44
Resuming the study of action “in rem”-what of bunkers on board? 45
The practicalities of arrest 47
THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY 51
A concerned owner and an unconcerned owner contrasted 51
German flag owners 52
Foreign flag owners-implementation of the 1952 Convention on Arrest 52
Shipowners' personal liability 53
Position where bunkers are supplied 53
New owners' liabilities for maritime claim unsatisfied under previous ownership 54
Duty of creditor to declare his motives for taking arrest action 54
Reciprocal arrangements 56
Practicalities of arrest 56
Provision of alternative security 57
Enforcement of arrest 58
Procedures when jurisdictionofarrest and jurisdiction “on the merits” are in conflict 58
Time limit 60
Judicial sale 61
Maritime liens 61
Possibility ofwrongful arrest 62
JAPAN 67
Introduction 67
(1) Provisional arrest 67
(2) Compulsory execution 67
(3) Public auction without a judgment 67
Maritime lien 68
Possessory lien 70
Mortgage 70
Types ofclaims 70
Evidence of existenceofa claim 71
(1) Provisional arrest 71
(2) Compulsory execution 71
(3) Public auction without ajudgment 71
Deposit to be put up by the arrestor 71
(1) Provisional arrest 71
(2) Compulsory execution 72
(3) Public auction without ajudgment 72
Counter-security 72
(1) Provisional arrest 72
(2) Compulsory execution 73
(3) Public auction without ajudgment 73
Authority 74
Form of application 74
Power of attorney 75
Enforcement of the order of arrest 75
Proceedings for maintaining an arrest 76
(1) Provisional arrest (2) Compulsory execution and (3) Public auction without a judgment 76
Appraisal 76
Sale 77
Proceeds of sale 77
Appeal proceedings 77
(1) Provisional arrest 77
(2) Compulsory evecutionand(3)Public auction without a judgment 78
International Conventions 78
Difference in treatment between Japanese and foreign ships 78
Time element 79
(1) Provisional arrest 79
(2) Compulsory execution and (3) Public auction without a judgment 79
Other particulars of interest 79
THE UNITED STATES 81
The United States court system 81
Arrest of vessels under United States law 83
Attachment of vessels under United States law 94