CML CMI Database: 6 R1-84 / 2022-4, 31 August 2022

This was an application to arrest the ship A on 31 August 2022. The plaintiff contended that it had a maritime claim of HRK 4,027,000 against the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that the prerequisites in art 344.1 of the Enforcement Act, read in connection with art 951.1 of the Maritime Code, had been met. In addition, the plaintiff submitted that the risk [ie periculum in mora] specified in art 344.1 of the Enforcement Act existed, if the claim had to be executed abroad (art 344.3 of the Enforcement Act), and that art 344.1 of the Enforcement Act provided that the plaintiff did not have to prove risk if it was likely that the defendant would suffer only minor damage from the proposed arrest measure. Since the defendant, in addition to ship A, owned three other ships, and maintained three national liner services, the plaintiff argued that the defendant had a ‘surplus’ ship that was not in operation, and that the proposed ship arrest would cause the defendant only minor damage, because it would still be able to maintain all its existing liner services with its remaining ships.

#nuscml #cmi #database #shiparrest #maritimeclaim #risk

https://cmlcmidatabase.org/6-r1-84-2022-4

The CML CMI database of Judicial Decisions on International Conventions aims to make these decisions more accessible to the worldwide maritime community, in the hope that this will foster comparative research and uniformity of interpretation of international maritime law. This project, which is undertaken and hosted by the Centre for Maritime Law of the National University of Singapore in collaboration with the Comité Maritime International, builds on the foundation laid by Francesco Berlingieri in his earlier CMI database of jurisprudence on maritime conventions.

Visit the database at: https://cmlcmidatabase.org/6-r1-84-2022-4