Silver Star Enterprises, Inc. v. Saramacca MV
1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 11328, 1996 A.M.C. 1715, 82 F.3d 666 (1996)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the Federal Maritime Lien Act, a maritime lien for necessaries does not arise when those necessaries, such as cargo containers, are leased in bulk to a fleet operator and not specifically furnished to or earmarked for a particular vessel.
Facts:
- Seheepvaart Maatschappij Suriname N.V. (SMS) operated a fleet of eight shipping vessels, including the M/V SARAMACCA.
- Silver Star Enterprises, Inc. held two preferred ship mortgages on the M/V SARAMACCA.
- Beginning in May 1991, Trans Ocean Ltd. leased up to 122 cargo containers to SMS for its entire fleet under a Master Container Lease.
- The lease agreement did not designate, or 'earmark,' specific containers for use on specific SMS vessels.
- The agreement gave SMS the flexibility to deploy the containers across its fleet and even use them for land or air transport (inter-modal use).
- SMS subsequently used some of the containers leased from Trans Ocean aboard the M/V SARAMACCA.
Procedural Posture:
- Silver Star Enterprises, Inc. filed an in rem action in federal district court to enforce its preferred ship mortgages against the M/V SARAMACCA.
- Trans Ocean Ltd. intervened in the lawsuit, claiming a maritime lien against the vessel for unpaid container lease fees.
- The M/V SARAMACCA was seized and sold, with the proceeds deposited into the court's registry.
- The district court granted partial summary judgment in favor of Trans Ocean, ruling that it held a valid maritime lien even though the containers were not earmarked for the M/V SARAMACCA.
- The district court ranked Trans Ocean's lien as having priority over Silver Star's mortgage for a portion of the proceeds.
- Silver Star, the appellant, appealed the district court's judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Federal Maritime Lien Act grant a maritime lien for cargo containers leased in bulk to a fleet operator when the lease does not earmark the containers for use on a particular vessel?
Opinions:
Majority - Jones, J.
No, the Federal Maritime Lien Act does not grant a maritime lien under these circumstances. To establish a maritime lien for necessaries, the supplier must demonstrate that the necessaries were provided 'to a vessel,' not merely to the vessel's owner for general use across a fleet. The court adopted the reasoning of the Second, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits, which rely on the Supreme Court's decision in Piedmont & Georges’ Creek Coal Co. v. Seaboard Fisheries Co. In Piedmont, a coal supplier who sold coal in bulk to a fleet owner was denied a lien because the supplier furnished the coal to the owner, and the owner, not the supplier, decided which vessels would receive it. Similarly, Trans Ocean furnished containers to SMS, the fleet operator, who then decided upon which vessel to place them. The court distinguished its prior holding in Equilease, noting that in that case, insurance was purchased for each specific vessel, which suggested earmarking. The court emphasized the importance of maintaining legal consistency among the circuits and stated that if the container leasing industry seeks such protection, it should petition Congress.
Analysis:
This decision aligns the Fifth Circuit with other federal appellate courts, creating a uniform rule that a maritime lien for 'necessaries' requires that they be furnished directly to a specific vessel. The ruling reinforces the precedent set by Piedmont, making it significantly harder for bulk suppliers to fleet operators to claim the powerful security of a maritime lien. It places the risk on suppliers to either structure their agreements to earmark goods for particular vessels or rely on standard credit arrangements rather than the special protection of maritime law. This promotes predictability in maritime commerce by clarifying the requirements for obtaining a lien.
