The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision has significant implications for the legal landscape involving properties confiscated by the Cuban government. In an 8-1 decision, the Court ruled that four cruise lines—Royal Caribbean Cruises, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings, Carnival Corp., and MSC Cruises—can be sued for utilizing docks in the Port of Havana that Cuba seized from an American company in the 1960s. This ruling revitalizes a case brought forward by Havana Docks Corp., which could potentially result in the cruise companies facing liabilities worth hundreds of millions of dollars. More on the ruling details can be found here.
The ruling centers on the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, commonly known as the Helms-Burton Act. This piece of legislation enables U.S. nationals to sue entities “trafficking” in properties that were confiscated by the Cuban government. While previous administrations, including those of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama, had suspended the right to sue under this act, the Trump administration allowed the suspension to lapse in 2019. The Supreme Court’s decision overruled a federal appeals court that had dismissed the case based on the premise that Havana Docks’ concession would have expired well before the cruise lines utilized the docks.
Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, highlighted that the cruise lines’ mere use of the confiscated docks was sufficient grounds for the lawsuit. According to Thomas, the confiscated property carried a taint, making anyone who used it liable. In dissent, however, Justice Elena Kagan argued that the docks belonged to Cuba, likening Havana Docks’ position to that of a “renter” whose lease had expired long before the companies began their operations.
While concurring with the overall decision, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, expressed concerns regarding the potential for repeated recoveries by Havana Docks from any party using the docks. This aspect of the ruling raises potential implications not just for maritime operators but also for future negotiations and activities involving properties linked to historical disputes stemming from Cuba’s socialist revolution.