Havana Docks seeks US Court of Appeals rehearing

Plaintiff Havana Docks filed for a rehearing by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals after a 2-1 ruling largely in favor of cruise companies.

Rehearing or hearing en banc

Havana Docks petitioned for a rehearing or a hearing en banc (by all 12 members of the court).

This follows the appeals court mostly siding with Carnival Corp., Royal Caribbean Group, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings and MSC Cruises in late October in long-running cases where a US national seeks compensation for property confiscated by Cuba's communist government under Title III of the Helms-Burton or Libertad Act.

'Question of exceptional importance'

An attorney for Havana Docks argued the divided (not unanimous) panel decision in the case conflicts with Glen v. Club Méditerranée, SA and 'involves the following question of exceptional importance: Whether the Libertad Act imposes liability for trafficking in property that the plaintiff hypothetically would have owned had the Cuban government not confiscated it, as opposed to property that the plaintiff actually owned at the time of confiscation and reflected in a claim against the Cuban government.'

In its October cruise line decision, the court said the property of Havana Docks confiscated by Cuba was the concession right to operate and profit from the docks for 99 years, which was set to expire in 2004. The facilities were used by the cruise lines from 2016 to 2019. The court said Havana Docks did not own the real property but had the concession right to operate and benefit from the port.

Related:US appeals court sides with cruise lines in Havana docks suit

However, the trafficking claims against Carnival were remanded for further proceedings based on its use of the docks from 1996 to 2001 (when subsidiary Costa Cruises operated voyages from Havana, which ceased after Carnival completed its acquisition of Costa).

Thanks to John Kavulich, president of the US-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, who has helped keep Seatrade Cruise News apprised of developments in these legal cases