[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13002-13003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4860]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[Docket No. 08-01]


Nathan Freeman v. Mediterranean Shipping Co. S.A. and Shipco 
Transport, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment

    Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal 
Maritime Commission (``Commission'') by Nathan Freeman. Complainant 
asserts that he is an individual residing in New York, New York. 
Complainant alleges that Respondent, Mediterranean Shipping Company 
S.A. (``MSC''), is an ocean common carrier with an office in New York, 
New York, and that Respondent, Shipco Transport, Inc. (``Shipco''), is 
a non-vessel-operating common carrier with offices in Bayonne, New 
Jersey and North Charleston, South Carolina.
    Complainant asserts that he engaged a freight forwarder to arrange 
for the transportation of a shipment consisting of two containers of 
scrap plastic, and that the forwarder engaged Respondent Shipco to 
carry such shipment from Jacksonville, Florida to the port of

[[Page 13003]]

Cotonou, Benin. Complainant also asserts that Shipco, in turn, arranged 
with Respondent MSC to carry Complainant's shipment. Complainant avers 
that his shipment arrived at the port of Cotonou, Benin on or about 
July 6, 2006. Complainant claims that, from approximately June 2006 to 
November 2006, his customs broker in Cotonou and Complainant's wife, 
Christiane Freeman, the designated consignee of the shipment and 
resident of Cotonou, made numerous demands to Respondents and their 
agents to provide the original bill of lading for Complainant's 
shipment. Complainant contends that Respondents refused to issue the 
original bill of lading.
    Complainant Freeman asserts that the port of Cotonou officials 
require production of an original bill of lading prior to releasing the 
shipment to Complainant, his wife, or his customs broker, and that 
Respondents knew, or should have known, of this requirement. 
Complainant also asserts that MSC wrongfully claimed that Complainant 
owed MSC approximately $20,000 for demurrage charges in connection with 
Complainant's shipment and that MSC refused to release the shipment 
unless payment of the alleged demurrage was made. Complainant claims 
that, in November 2006, the port of Cotonou customs officials 
``confiscated and seized'' Complainant's shipment due to Complainant's 
inability to acquire from Respondents the original bill of lading 
necessary to take possession of the shipment.
    Complainant alleges that Respondents violated the Shipping Act of 
1984 (``the Shipping Act'') by refusing to issue an original bill of 
lading to Complainant thereby preventing Complainant from taking 
possession of the shipment, and that Respondents' refusal directly 
caused Complainant's loss of his entire shipment and property. 
Complainant also alleges that Respondents ``unreasonably, fraudulently 
and deceitfully attempted to extort alleged demurrage charges'' from 
Complainant in January 2007, even though Respondents knew, or should 
have known, that the shipment had been previously confiscated by the 
port of Cotonou customs officials. Complainant asserts that the 
foregoing activities by Respondents constitute an unreasonable practice 
related to the delivery of property in violation of 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) 
(formerly Sec.  10(d)(1) of the Shipping Act).
    Complainant claims that he has been injured and damaged in the sum 
of $80,000.00 for the value of the property of the shipment and seeks 
this amount as reparations, or in the event of insufficient evidence of 
such loss, seeks $21,367.00 as reimbursement of ocean freight, other 
shipment charges, and cost of the property. Complainant also seeks an 
award of reasonable attorney's fees and punitive damages, to be 
determined by the Commission, for the willful, wrongful, and illegal 
conduct of Respondents in their refusal to issue an original bill of 
lading and release Complainant's property.
    Complainant requests that the Commission require Respondents to: 
(1) Answer the charges in the subject complaint; (2) cease and desist 
from the aforesaid violation of the Shipping Act; (3) establish and put 
in force such practices as the Commission determines to be lawful and 
reasonable; and (4) pay to Complainant by way of reparations the sum of 
$80,000.00 with interest, attorney's fees and punitive damages, or such 
other sum as the Commission determines. Additionally, Complainant 
requests that the Commission issue further order(s) as it determines to 
be proper.
    This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative 
Law Judges. Hearing in this matter, if any is held, shall commence 
within the time limitations prescribed in 46 CFR 502.61, and only after 
consideration has been given by the parties and the presiding officer 
to the use of alternative forms of dispute resolution. The hearing 
shall include oral testimony and cross-examination in the discretion of 
the presiding officer only upon proper showing that there are genuine 
issues of material fact that cannot be resolved on the basis of sworn 
statements, affidavits, depositions, or other documents or that the 
nature of the matter in issue is such that an oral hearing and cross-
examination are necessary for the development of an adequate record. 
Pursuant to the further terms of 46 CFR 502.61, the initial decision of 
the presiding officer in this proceeding shall be issued by March 5, 
2009, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by July 
3, 2009.

Karen V. Gregory,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-4860 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P