When a Boat Crash Doesn’t Mean a Windfall: Court Limits What Vessel Owners
Can Recover
White PEARL Invs., LLC v. Lucia, No. 25-20943-CIV-DAMIAN/D’ANGELO, 2026 U.S., Dist. LEXIS 103763 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 10, 2026)
A Florida federal court recently drew a firm line around the types of damages a vessel owner can collect after a maritime collision. The dispute arose after a large yacht struck a docked vessel at a marina in Aventura, Florida. Liability was never in question. The at-fault vessel admitted it caused the damage. The disagreement was entirely about money. The damaged vessel’s owner sought not only repair costs and lost charter revenue, but also the full value of a pending sale that fell through because of the incident. The owner argued this lost sale should be treated as lost profits, entitling them to recover the entire purchase price while keeping the repaired boat.
The court rejected that theory. Under longstanding maritime law, a vessel owner whose boat is damaged, but not destroyed, is entitled to be made whole, meaning restored to the position they were in before the incident. That means repair costs and lost income during the repair period are fair game. But recovering the market value of the vessel on top of repair costs would put the owner in a better position than before the accident, which is exactly what the law prohibits. A lost sale, the court found, is simply a repackaged claim for diminished market value, which is a category of damages that maritime courts have consistently refused to award.
Injured Seaman’s Claims Head to Arbitration, But Not All of Them, and Not Against Everyone
Chemaly v. Lampert, No. 24-10797, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 11481 (11th Cir. Apr. 22, 2026)
A federal appeals court issued a nuanced ruling on the reach of arbitration clauses in international maritime employment agreements. A seaman working aboard a 288-foot private yacht was injured when a fellow crew member dropped his hold on a heavy piece of equipment, shifting…