The Legal and Ethical Environment of Business, Essay Example

All ships that International Industries company owns are flagged in the Bahamas and Liberia. The flag of convenience rules have public and private implications. Private law is relative in the employer-employee, passenger contract, and cargo contract obligations of the ship. Public law interfaces with these rules in that ships and companies pick and choose flags on convenience for the individual ships based upon liability concerns including negligence, contractual labor, customs, immigration and/or environmental laws. The flag of convenience arrangement, also known as foreign registries, offered by the Bahamas, Liberia, Panama, and other countries, permit ship owners to avoid most of the wage and labor laws of the United States. A ship is subject to liability as if it were within the country whose flag it flies. Your International Industries company passenger tickets and contracts also make reference to this fact that all claims by passengers or employees must be litigated in and under the law of the country whose flag the ship in question flies. In this particular scenario, Mr. and Mrs. John Doe were passengers on one of your company’s smaller cruise ships, The Sailfin, for a week-long journey from Miami, with stops in Nassau, Key West, and the Grand Cayman Islands. The Sailfin flies the flag of Liberia. One night during the cruise, the Does returned to their cabin and find two ship employees removing cash and Mrs. Doe’s jewelry from the ship-provided safe. Mr. Doe struggled with the men, but he collapsed and suffered a nearly fatal heart attack. Both Mr. and Mrs. Doe were locked inside the cabin restroom, and the robbers escaped. A few hours later, the ship docked in the Grand Cayman Islands, and the two robbers left the ship with the cash and jewelry. The robbers did not return to the ship. Mr. and Mrs. Doe were rescued several hours after the ship left the Grand Cayman Islands and identified the two employees in a photo lineup. Mr. Doe was air-evacuated to the Islands for treatment and then medically evacuated back to the United States. The day after her return to Miami, Mrs. Doe’s attorney faxed the International Industries company a letter threatening to sue it for negligent supervision, training, hiring of employees, emotional distress, assault, battery, theft, and wrongful injury unless the company tendered the sum of $5 million dollars plus medical expenses within 10 business days. Under Liberian law, it is assumed a wife is the property of the husband and has no standing to sue or claim damages for her husband’s injuries, and further that any property within the possession of the husband and wife is deemed to be the sole property of the husband.

Identification and Discussion of Public and Private Law Ramifications for the International Industries Company

Because the Sailfin was traveling between international waters and U.S. waters there was a space of time between the time that these individuals in this study, or Mr. and Mrs. Doe, were attacked and the incident reported. Private law consideration of the International Industries Company are those relating to not only negligence but as well law relating to Admiralty Law in which the court could hand down a decision for the application of the Liberian Maritime Law or could alternatively hand down a decision stating its refusal to exercise jurisdiction over this matter.  The work of Taylor (2007) states as follows: “In general international maritime law is consistent among all countries.” (Legal Database, 2006 cited in Taylor, 2007, p. 2) Furthermore, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) standards govern the operation of cruise vessels globally. The ICCL states “If crimes do occur the appropriate law enforcement authorizes will be called in to investigate and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. We will continue to cooperate with the authorities to ensure that perpetrators of crime are brought to justice.” (ICCL, 2006 cited in Taylor, 2007, p. 2) According to the Workplace Code of Conduct that the ICCL issued the Coast Guard possesses jurisdiction and can inspect as well as enforce international safety and security standards for all ships calling at U.S. ports. (ICCL, 2006 cited in: Taylor, 2007, p. 2) Private law as it related to international transactions enables business to be autonomous and in this case the ICCL code of ethics and standards. Private law would be applicable in this incident adhering to the ICCL code, which states that a ship leaving a U.S. port may be governed by laws of the United States. Public law would be upheld in the Constitution of the Republic of Liberia in this case as well. In the case of Douglas Spector, Ana Spector, Julia Hollenbeck, David T. Killough and Rodger Peters Individually and Behalf of All Similarly Situated Persons, Plaintiff. Vs. Norwegian Cruise Line Limited d/b/a/ Norwegian Cruise Line, Defendant in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division, C.A. No. H-00-2659 in United States’ Sur-Reply as Amicus Curiae to Defendant’s Reply in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss it is stated as follows:

“According to NCL, it is the flag of the ship, not the geographic location of where the ship sails, that dictates extraterritoriality.   Thus, according to NCL, the application of the ADA to foreign ships sailing on United States waters is an extraterritorial application, regardless of the fact that the ships were operating within the territory of the United States.” (Spector, et al vs Norwegian Cruise Line, Yeomans, Wodatch, Werfel and Sutherland, date unknown)

NCL is stated to have quoted dicta from Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571, 584-585 (1953) stating that the flag state “could sometimes retain ‘concurrent jurisdiction’ over a crime that occurred on the ship while it was in the territorial waters of another country.” (Spector, et al vs Norwegian Cruise Line,  Yeomans, Wodatch, Werfel and Sutherland,  date unknown) In addition, the flag state may exercise concurrent jurisdiction over certain actions that occur on the ship while it is in foreign waters.” (Spector, et al vs Norwegian Cruise Line, Yeomans, Wodatch, Werfel and Sutherland,  date unknown)

Explanation of How the Legalities Would Be Different if the Incident Happened at the International Industries Company’s Resort on U.S. Mainland

The relief available for Mr. and Mrs. Doe would be more characteristic of a cut and dried matter if the incident would have occurred in the United States and considerations by the International Industries company would be much greater should this have been the case. This is because bad publicity would surely arise from this case, which would serve to tarnish the reputation of the company. It is likely that in this specific case that the International Industries company can take one of two pathways for resolving this situation:

(1) play a waiting game and hope that Mrs. Doe fails to sue or that the court rules that she does not have the right to sue; and

(2) attempt to make some offer to Mr. and Mrs. Doe to resolve this legal dispute. (Taylor, 2007, paraphrased)

While Mrs. Doe cannot sue in Liberia because according to the laws in the Republic of Liberia the wife is assumed to be the property of the husband and has no legal standing to file suit or to make a claim of damages for the injury her husband sustained. As well, any property that the woman possesses is held to be the sole property of the husband. Therefore, in this case, Mr. Doe would be the proper party to file suit if the suit were filed in Liberia rather than under the international seas governance or the governance of the U.S. in this matter.

It is interesting that when aboard a cruise ship the crimes that occur are often in what is termed to be ‘no man’s land’ in terms of applicable law enforcement jurisdiction. The only law enforcement agency that can investigate a crime occurring on international waters is the Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I.) In fact, Maritime law on the international level is underdeveloped in U.S. law.

Actions That International Industries Company Should Take for Mr. and Mrs. Doe in Regards to Development of Policies for Future Criminal Incidents

After having experienced the situation with Mr. and Mrs. Doe, International Industries company most certainly will desire to put policies in place as well as safeguards to prevent such a situation from occurring in the future. This may include such as additional security aboard ships and in ports of call. The International Industries company has a liability when it comes to the safety of customers and not only is the company bound under Liberian laws and regulations but as well the company is bound by internationally applicable laws and the laws of the seaports that the cruise line ships make port of call in.

References

ICCL, International Council of Cruise Lines, “Cruise Industry Standards”, “Safety Standards”, [Electronic Version] retrieved on January 10, 2006 from http://www.iccl.org/policies/safety.cfm in: Taylor, Sheri (2007) Public and Private Law Ramifications for Cruise Ships. 8 Feb 2007. Associated Content. Retrieved from: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/136471/public_and_private_law_ramifications_pg2.html?cat=3

Cruise Ship Security: Travel Security & Safety 92010) Crime Doctor. Retrieved from: http://www.crimedoctor.com/cruise1.htm

Yeomans, W.R., Wodatch, J.L., Breen, P.L., Werfel, D.I. and Sutherland, D.W. (date unknown) United States Sur-Reply as Amicus Curiae to defendant’s Reply in Supports of its Motion to Dismiss.

Legal Database, “Admiralty Law Overview”, [Electronic Version] retrieved on January 10, 2006 from http://www.legal-database.com/admiralty-law-overview.htm. in: Taylor, Sheri (2007) Public and Private Law Ramifications for Cruise Ships. 8 Feb 2007. Associated Content. Retrieved from: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/136471/public_and_private_law_ramifications_pg2.html?cat=3