Cruise Lines Win Most Arguments Before 11th Circuit Court Of Appeals. Does Havana Docks Corporation Seek En Banc Review, U.S. Supreme Court Review, Or Accept Decision?

Can Accept Decision, Appeal For En Banc Review- All Twelve Members Of The 11th Circuit Court Of Appeals, Or Can Seek Writ of Certiorari From The U.S. Supreme Court

No. 23-10171: HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee Cross Appellant, versus ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD., NORWEGIAN CRUISE LINE HOLDINGS, LTD., CARNIVAL CORPORATION, a foreign corporation doing business as Carnival Cruise Lines, MSC CRUISES S.A. CO., MSC CRUISES (USA), INC., et al., Defendants-Appellants Cross Appellees.

Excerpts

After a review of the record, and with the benefit of oral argument, we hold that Havana Docks’ limited property interest had expired, for purposes of Title III, at the time of the alleged trafficking by the cruise lines. We therefore set aside the judgments in favor of Havana Docks and remand for further proceedings as to its other claims against Carnival.

We affirm the district court’s ruling that Havana Docks is a U.S. national under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act but reverse the judgments in favor of Havana Docks and against the cruise lines for conduct taking place between 2016 and 2019. We remand for further proceedings as to the trafficking claims against Carnival based on conduct taking place from 1996 to 2001.

10/22/2024- Opinion issued by court as to Appellant RCL in 23-10151, Appellant-Cross Appellee RCL in 23-10171. Decision: Affirmed in part, Reversed in part, and Remanded. Opinion type: Published. Opinion method: Signed. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions. [23-10151, 23-10171]
10/22/2024- Judgment entered as to Appellant RCL in 23-10151, Appellant-Cross Appellee RCL in 23-10171. [23-10151, 23-10171]

Havana Docks Corporation v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. 23-10151; 1:19-cv-23590-BB; Court Opinion; 10-22-2024; Hon. Adalberto J. Jordan authoring; Hon. Andrew Lynn Brasher dissenting

Dissent Excerpts

In my view, there are three problems with this judicially created prove-a-counterfactual requirement. First, it is not supported by the statute’s text. The text of the statute says that the trafficking must occur when a plaintiff “owns the claim,” not when the plaintiff would have owned the property. Second, the majority is focused on the wrong confiscated property. Here, Havana Docks argues that the cruise lines trafficked by using the physical docks that the Cuban Government confiscated, not by using its concessionary interest in those docks. Third, this test effectively voids many of the property interests that are expressly protected by the statute. The statute was enacted in 1994 and it expressly protects interests that were contingent, future, and time limited when the underlying property was confiscated in 1959, but none of those interests are protectible under the majority’s rule. I’ll address each of these issues in turn.

Unless and until the property confiscation claims of U.S. nationals are paid, those claims continue to exist and are enforceable under the Helms-Burton Act. But the majority opinion’s interpretation means that the Act provides no remedy for U.S. nationals with property interests that were confiscated in 1959 but, absent confiscation, would have “expired” before the present day. It does so even though there is no textual support for that result and even though the Act expressly protects interests that were contingent or time-limited when they were confiscated. And it adopts that rule even though there is a perfectly rational alternative that better conforms to the Act—that the time-limited nature of an interest in confiscated property goes to the value of a claim, not to the claim’s existence.

I believe the district court correctly interpreted the Act in this respect, and I would go on to address the other issues in the appeal. Because the majority opinion instead reverses on this ground, I respectfully dissent.

LINK TO COMPLETE OPINION IN PDF FORMAT