This is a blog about maritime law, right?
So, you want me to motor past my recent success before the U.S. Court of Appeals Eleventh Circuit in connection with the Montreal Convention governing the international carriage of goods by air? That we saved the client from a $10 million-plus exposure in connection with an air cargo damage claim probably isn’t much interest to you wet types, is it?
I know what you’re thinking, “this is WorkBoat John, not some aviation rag.”
Hey there, don’t click away just yet ‘cause there’s some learning that can be had from this recent success. First, the appellate process works. It’s a tough road, but solid appellate work can sometimes turn the tide. That is, just because you touched bottom doesn’t mean you need to abandon ship. You might still find yourself some good water. Second, litigation under the Montreal Convention is code-driven meaning that it’s largely about the plain meaning of the Act. And air cargo litigation involves the same analytical approach as is needed when wrestling with the Carriage Of Goods By Sea Act, the looming Rotterdam Rules, the Code of Federal Regulations, state pilotage rules, etc. Read the code language, take a look at the law interpreting the same, and analyze your arguments.
Of course, don’t forget the deft touch of a talented transportation attorney. The right one can be as helpful as the weathered pilot making that all important course correction with a low murmur and careful tilt of coffee cup.
Underway and making way.