Legal Procedures

LEGAL PROCEDURES FOR MARITIME CLAIMS IN SOUTH AMERICA

BRAZIL

Brazil has its own domestic procedure for maritime claims and ship arrest. Brazil has not ratified the 1952 or 1999 international ship arrest conventions, so the procedure is mainly based on Brazilian law, including the Commercial Code and Civil Procedure Code. A creditor normally needs to demonstrate a valid claim and a sufficient reason for urgent judicial protection. For example, the possibility that a vessel may leave Brazilian waters can be relevant when requesting a precautionary measure.

For a ship supplier, repair company, marine contractor or other maritime creditor, the first step is normally to review the contract, invoices, delivery documents, correspondence and evidence showing who ordered and received the services or goods. The identity of the owner, charterer, operator and other relevant parties must also be investigated.

Where the legal requirements are satisfied, a Brazilian court may be asked to order a vessel arrest or another protective measure. Brazilian-qualified legal representation is required, and foreign documents may need appropriate notarisation, legalisation or apostille.

The exact remedy depends on the nature of the maritime claim and the circumstances of the vessel. Therefore, a foreign creditor should obtain a local legal assessment before taking action.

ARGENTINA

Argentina has a specific legal framework for maritime claims and vessel arrest. It has not ratified the 1952 or 1999 Ship Arrest Conventions, and ship arrests are principally governed by the Argentine Navigation Law.

Depending on the circumstances, an Argentine vessel may be arrested for a maritime lien or for certain debts connected with the vessel's use, navigation or exploitation. Foreign vessels can also be subject to arrest in circumstances recognised by Argentine law, including certain maritime liens and qualifying claims connected with Argentina.

For an unpaid maritime invoice, the first task is to establish the legal basis of the claim and identify the correct debtor. Documents such as invoices, delivery receipts, purchase orders, signed acknowledgements, emails and evidence of services performed can be important.

An application for arrest involves procedural requirements, including court fees and, depending on the circumstances, counter-security to protect against potential damages arising from an unjustified arrest. A power of attorney for the local lawyers is also normally required.

Because Argentina distinguishes between different types of maritime claims, an unpaid invoice should be examined individually rather than assuming that every maritime debt automatically permits arrest.

CHILE

Chile has a domestic legal procedure for vessel arrest. It has not ratified an international ship arrest convention, and the principal rules are found in Book III of the Chilean Commercial Code, including provisions specifically dealing with vessel arrest and release.

A vessel may be arrested where the claimant has a qualifying credit recognised by Chilean maritime law. The legal framework distinguishes between privileged maritime credits and other claims that may support an arrest under the applicable provisions.

For a ship supplier or marine service company, the procedure normally begins with a review of the underlying transaction. The creditor should be able to demonstrate what was supplied or performed, who requested it, when it was delivered or completed and what amount remains unpaid.

The vessel's ownership, flag, operator, charter arrangements and location are also important. If the vessel is approaching or already located in a Chilean port, the timing of a precautionary application may become particularly relevant.

In some circumstances, an arrest can operate as security while the underlying maritime dispute is determined. Chilean procedure also contains rules concerning the continuation of proceedings after a prejudicial precautionary measure is granted.

The appropriate strategy therefore depends on the type of maritime claim, the evidence available and the jurisdictional circumstances.

COLOMBIA

Colombia has a developed legal framework for maritime claims and vessel arrest. Maritime matters can involve Colombian commercial and procedural legislation as well as regional rules applicable to maritime claims. The circumstances of the particular claim determine whether a vessel can be arrested and what security or procedural requirements apply.

For an unpaid maritime invoice, the creditor should first establish the contractual relationship and collect supporting evidence. Invoices, purchase orders, delivery receipts, signed documents, correspondence and proof that the vessel received the goods or services can all be relevant.

A ship arrest is not simply a commercial debt collection notice. It is a judicial measure designed to secure a qualifying claim. The court will examine the legal basis for the requested measure and the circumstances surrounding the claim.

After an arrest, the vessel owner or another interested party may seek its release by providing appropriate security. Colombian maritime procedure also recognises the possibility of consequences where an arrest is unjustified or excessive.

If the dispute ultimately proceeds to judicial sale, specific notification and procedural requirements apply.

For international creditors, early identification of the vessel, owner, operator and available jurisdiction is particularly important. Local maritime counsel should review the claim before an arrest application is filed.

PERU

Peru has a specific international and regional legal framework concerning ship arrest. Peru approved the International Convention on Arrest of Ships 1999, and Andean Community Decision No. 487 also contains provisions concerning maritime liens, naval mortgages and vessel arrest.

A creditor generally needs a qualifying maritime claim or maritime credit before seeking an arrest. Depending on the claim, the relevant legal framework can cover matters such as damage caused by vessel operations, personal injury, salvage, environmental damage, carriage contracts and mortgages.

The practical process normally begins by preparing evidence of the claim and identifying where the vessel is located. A First Instance Civil Judge may have jurisdiction to issue the relevant order, with the National Port Authority notified so that the vessel is not permitted to sail contrary to the judicial order.

Security may be required from the claimant, depending on the circumstances. The shipowner may also provide security to obtain release of the vessel. Forms of security can include cash, bank guarantees or other arrangements accepted by the court.

For a foreign supplier or maritime service company, the quality of the documentary evidence is therefore extremely important. Local counsel should assess the claim, jurisdiction and appropriate precautionary remedy before proceedings begin.

ECUADOR

Ecuador is a party to the International Convention on Arrest of Ships 1999, which provides an international framework for the arrest of vessels in connection with recognised maritime claims. Ecuador ratified the Convention in 2011.

The Convention generally treats arrest as a pre-trial security measure rather than the final enforcement of a judgment. It also establishes rules concerning the types of maritime claims that may support arrest and circumstances in which a particular vessel or another vessel may be arrested.

For a ship supplier, repair company or marine contractor, the practical process begins with establishing the debt and collecting the relevant evidence. This may include invoices, delivery documents, service reports, purchase orders, correspondence and confirmation that the vessel received the goods or services.

The vessel's current ownership and location must then be established. If the vessel is approaching an Ecuadorian port, local counsel can assess whether the claim satisfies the requirements for a precautionary arrest application.

An arrested vessel may generally be released when appropriate security is provided, subject to the applicable court procedure.

Because international conventions interact with Ecuadorian procedural rules, an arrest application should be prepared by lawyers familiar with Ecuadorian maritime practice. A foreign creditor should not assume that an unpaid invoice automatically creates a right to arrest.

URUGUAY

Uruguay has developed its own legal framework for vessel arrest. Uruguay is not a party to the 1952 or 1999 international ship arrest conventions, but it adopted Ships Arrest Act No. 18.803, which established a specific domestic framework for vessel arrest and simplified aspects of the procedure.

The practical starting point is to determine whether the creditor has a legally recognised maritime claim and whether the vessel is within a jurisdiction where an arrest can be requested.

For an unpaid ship supply or marine service claim, supporting evidence is important. The creditor should normally provide invoices, delivery receipts, service reports, purchase orders, correspondence and information showing that the goods or services were provided to the vessel.

Uruguay's civil-law system also permits precautionary measures that can be used to protect a creditor's position while the underlying dispute is considered.

The vessel's ownership and the identity of the party responsible for the debt should be investigated before proceedings are started. This can be particularly important where the supplier dealt with a charterer, ship manager or local agent rather than directly with the registered owner.

If an arrest is obtained, the owner may seek release of the vessel by providing appropriate security or through another procedure available under Uruguayan law.

The correct procedure depends on the claim and supporting evidence, so a local maritime lawyer should assess the case before any arrest application is made.

VENEZUELA

Venezuela has a specialised maritime legal framework dealing with vessel arrest and maritime claims. The rules governing ship arrest are largely connected with the International Convention on Arrest of Ships as incorporated into Venezuelan maritime legislation. Article 93 of the Law on Maritime Commerce sets out maritime claims that can give rise to arrest.

The framework can permit arrest of the vessel connected with the maritime claim and, in appropriate circumstances, a sister vessel. However, the precise ownership and liability requirements must be examined in every case.

For a creditor, the process begins with proving the existence of the maritime claim. Documents such as recognised private agreements, accepted invoices, charter parties, bills of lading and other evidence may be relevant. Where the evidence is not sufficient, the court may require security before granting the arrest.

A practical investigation should identify the vessel's IMO number, current name, registered owner, operator, charterer, flag and expected Venezuelan port. Timing can be important because the purpose of an arrest is generally to secure the claim while the underlying dispute is dealt with.

The owner may seek release by providing appropriate security, depending on the circumstances and court requirements.

For international maritime creditors, Venezuelan local counsel is particularly important because the interaction between maritime legislation, procedural requirements and the specific claim must be assessed before proceedings are commenced.

PARAGUAY

Paraguay has a river-based maritime legal environment, particularly relevant to vessels operating on the Paraguay-Parana Waterway. Ship arrest procedures are governed by provisions of the Code of Commerce and the Civil Procedural Code, with general rules concerning injunctions and interim measures also relevant.

A creditor may seek an arrest where there is a qualifying credit against the vessel. The claimant can request an arrest separately or together with the principal claim. If the arrest is obtained before the main claim is filed, the claimant may have a limited period to commence the substantive proceedings; otherwise, the arrest may be lifted.

The court will consider matters such as the apparent validity of the claim, urgency and the risk that the creditor's position could otherwise be weakened. Security may also be required.

For ship suppliers, repair companies and other river-service providers, documentary evidence is essential. The creditor should retain invoices, delivery receipts, signed acknowledgements, purchase orders, service reports and communications with the vessel or debtor.

The General Naval Prefecture may become involved in implementing a judicial arrest order.

Because Paraguay's maritime activity is strongly connected to inland river navigation, the vessel type and location must be examined carefully. A local lawyer should determine the correct court, procedure and evidence required for the particular claim.

BOLIVIA

Bolivia requires a different approach because it is a landlocked country and its maritime activity is primarily connected with inland river navigation and international waterways. Important commercial operations are connected with the Paraguay-Parana Waterway and river ports in the Santa Cruz region.

For this reason, a vessel-related debt in Bolivia should not automatically be treated in the same way as a conventional sea-going ship arrest in Brazil or Argentina.

The first step is to identify the vessel, its flag, ownership, operator and location and then determine the legal nature of the claim. Invoices, delivery documents, service records, purchase orders and correspondence should be collected before any legal application is considered.

Bolivian port and navigation authorities have powers concerning vessel inspections, navigation authorisations and detention for regulatory or safety reasons. These administrative powers should be distinguished from a private creditor's attempt to obtain judicial security for a commercial debt.

Where a creditor believes that a precautionary judicial measure may be available, the matter should be reviewed under the applicable Bolivian procedural and transport legislation.

For ship suppliers, repair companies and other maritime creditors, local legal advice is particularly important because the availability and form of a private vessel-related protective measure can depend on the type of vessel, waterway, claim and applicable jurisdiction.

The objective is to identify the legally available remedy rather than assume that a conventional ship arrest procedure applies automatically.

GUYANA

Guyana has an admiralty procedure allowing qualifying claims to be brought against maritime property in appropriate circumstances. The Supreme Court Civil Procedure Rules provide a procedure for an admiralty action in rem and allow a claimant to seek a warrant for the arrest of the relevant property.

The procedure requires the claimant to provide information about the claim, the vessel or property involved and other relevant details. For a foreign vessel, additional notification requirements may apply.

This framework can be particularly relevant to maritime creditors because admiralty claims may involve the vessel itself rather than only a personal claim against the debtor.

For an unpaid ship supply, repair or marine service debt, the creditor should prepare the commercial documents supporting the claim. These may include invoices, delivery receipts, service reports, purchase orders, correspondence and evidence that the vessel received the goods or services.

Once a warrant of arrest is issued and executed, the vessel remains under judicial control until the court orders its release or another appropriate step is taken. Security can be provided in suitable circumstances to obtain release. A recent Caribbean Court of Justice case involving Guyana illustrates the use of a P&I Club Letter of Undertaking as security for release.

For foreign maritime creditors, early coordination with Guyanese admiralty counsel is important. The legal basis of the claim, correct defendant, vessel identity and procedural requirements should all be checked before arrest proceedings begin.

SURINAME

Suriname has an active maritime and river-port sector, including commercial shipping through Paramaribo and other ports and waterways. However, a private maritime creditor should not assume that a conventional ship arrest regime applies in exactly the same way as in countries with a detailed statutory arrest framework.

The first step in a Surinamese maritime claim is therefore to identify the legal basis of the debt and determine which current procedural remedy is available. This can be particularly important following changes to Suriname's civil-law framework and maritime administration.

For an unpaid invoice involving ship supplies, repairs, technical services or other marine work, the creditor should collect the complete documentary record. Useful evidence may include invoices, purchase orders, delivery receipts, signed service reports, vessel communications and correspondence concerning the outstanding balance.

The vessel's current location, ownership, operator, flag and expected port movements should also be established.

Where urgent protection is required, local Surinamese counsel can assess whether a precautionary measure, attachment or another form of judicial relief is available under the current procedural rules.

Administrative vessel detention by maritime authorities should also be distinguished from a private creditor's judicial remedy.

For international ship suppliers and maritime service companies, early legal assessment is therefore important. The correct procedure will depend on the nature of the claim, the parties involved, the vessel and the jurisdiction in which the requested remedy is sought.

PANAMA

Panama has a specialised maritime court system and a detailed statutory framework for maritime proceedings under Law No. 8 of 1982, which created the Maritime Courts and established maritime procedural rules.

Panamanian maritime procedure provides mechanisms for the judicial seizure of vessels and other maritime property to secure qualifying maritime credits, maritime liens or other claims that can legally be enforced against the relevant property.

A creditor seeking vessel security should normally identify the vessel, its location and the legal basis of the claim. Supporting documents such as invoices, contracts, delivery receipts, service records and correspondence are important for demonstrating the underlying maritime credit.

The seizure application can contain information concerning where, when and how the vessel can be located for execution. Once the relevant judicial order is issued, the maritime authorities and court officers have defined roles in implementing the seizure.

Panama also provides procedures for lifting a seizure, including the use of security in appropriate circumstances.

For international maritime creditors, Panama can therefore involve a highly structured judicial process. However, the availability of seizure depends on the legal character of the claim and the applicable procedural requirements.

A Panamanian maritime lawyer should review the claim before proceedings are commenced, particularly where the creditor is a foreign ship supplier, repair company, bunker supplier or technical contractor.

UNDERSTANDING MARITIME LEGAL PROCEDURES

Maritime legal procedures are not identical across South America. The same unpaid invoice may have different legal consequences depending on the vessel, contract, owner, flag, location, maritime claim and local legislation.

South America Maritime Claims coordinates with local maritime lawyers and legal professionals to assess the appropriate procedure in each jurisdiction. The objective is to identify the available legal remedy, preserve the creditor's position and determine whether negotiation, debt collection, precautionary relief, vessel arrest or court proceedings may be appropriate.

If your company has an unpaid maritime claim, provide the vessel name and IMO number, claim amount, invoices, delivery or service documents, debtor details and the vessel's current or expected location for an initial legal assessment.