Whilst being a common law instrument, it has been codified under s.21(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981[2] along with s.21(2)[3] and s.21(4),[4] its statutory counterparts.
This includes the vessel (also covering its appurtenances and equipment), services rendered to it or injuries caused by that property.
For example, a 2006 US case named the vessel (M/V Henrich S) and "her engines, tackle, nets, gear, apparel, appurtenances, etc., in rem" as defendant.
By remaining invisible from the moment of attachment, the lien is capable of surviving a change of ownership, even by a good faith purchaser.
In the UK there is a closed list of situations where a maritime lien arises, being; salvage,[7] seamen's wages,[8] damage done by a ship due to wrongful act of manoeuvre,[9] bottomry (although this no longer is used) and masters remunerations and disbursements.
The contractual shipowner's lien is currently found in all contracts for carriage of goods by sea nowadays, and may be claimed if the shippers fail to pay the due on time.
Besides, the processes to find the rightful shipowner, the defendant, are very complicated and time consuming due to the complex and inconsistent ship registration in different countries.
If the defendant does not provide enough security as compensation, the court may sell the “res” in order to achieve the satisfaction for the claim.
[13] Furthermore, a maritime lien will rank above other secured creditors and only is after the costs arising from the arrest and sale of the ship.
The intention to waive the lien should be shown clearly required by the court and the credit of the lienholder will be considered.
A person fails to arrest the ship within a reasonable time may result in cancellation of the original claim.
The court will weight and analyze all related factors between the transaction and the respective legal systems by a case-by-case analysis.
If the relevant factors direct to select international law, the case may be dismissed on the grounds of forum non conveniens.