Resumen de Navigating the waters between admiralty and cross-border insolvency: A comparison of the australian, german and french positions
One of the unresolved issues arising out of the interaction of admiralty law and cross-border insolvency law is the extent to which local maritime claimants can arrest ships and thereby have their claims satisfied despite the existence of foreign insolvency proceedings against the defendant shipowner. This article examines the nature of the security interest held by a maritime claimant that arrests or attaches a ship in Australia, Germany or France, and considers how those interests are treated under the cross-border insolvency regimes of those jurisdictions. It concludes with several recommendations for reform of Australian law. I. INTRODUCTION On 31 August 2016 Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd, South Korea’s largest and one of the world’s top ten container lines, filed for bankruptcy in Seoul. 1 This immediately sparked a worldwide scramble to issue arrest proceedings against its ships in other jurisdictions, given South Korean law’s notorious hostility towards maritime claims in rem . There are even reports that a number of Hanjin ships have been instructed to circle the globe, rather than put into a port and risk arrest. 2 Much like the downfall of STX Pan Ocean in 2013, the
