Prize court

Last updated
British prize court in World War I The Times history of the war (1914) (14762199554).jpg
British prize court in World War I

A prize court is a court (or even a single individual, such as an ambassador or consul) authorized to consider whether prizes have been lawfully captured, typically whether a ship has been lawfully captured or seized in time of war or under the terms of the seizing ship's letters of marque and reprisal. A prize court may order the sale or destruction of the seized ship, and the distribution of any proceeds to the captain and crew of the seizing ship. A prize court may also order the return of a seized ship to its owners if the seizure was unlawful, such as if seized from a country which had proclaimed its neutrality.

History/jurisdiction in various countries

Prize courts were common in the 17th through 19th centuries, during times of American or European naval warfare. The United States in 1780 established the Federal Court of Appeals in Cases of Capture to hear appeals of prize cases from state prize courts; this court was ended in 1787, after conclusion of the war. Under current U.S. law, pursuant to 10 U.S.C.   §§ 7651 7681, the district courts have exclusive jurisdiction in prize cases. Due to changes in the nature of naval warfare, no prize cases have been heard since the statutes were adopted in 1956.

In England and Wales, prize jurisdiction is exercised by the Admiralty Court, part of the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice (see Prize Courts Act 1894 and Senior Courts Act 1981, ss. 20(1)(d), 27 and 62(2)), and by way of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

In France, the prize council (Conseil des prises) has jurisdiction to determine the issue of the prize. Since 2007, piracy has been transferred to criminal courts. The council's jurisdiction is reduced to war time. The way of appeal is open to the President of the French Republic acting as judge.

The International Prize Court was an international court proposed at the beginning of the 20th century, to hear prize cases. An international agreement, the Convention Relative to the Creation of an International Prize Court, was established at The Hague on October 18, 1907, but this was never ratified or implemented.

An important factor in the diminishing importance of prize courts was the adoption of the navicert system for managing the British blockades in WWI and WWII. [1]

Related Research Articles

Habeas corpus is an equitable remedy by which a report can be made to a court alleging the unlawful detention or imprisonment of an individual, and requesting that the court order the individual's custodian to bring the prisoner to court, to determine whether their detention is lawful.

Jurisdiction is the legal term for the legal authority granted to a legal entity to enact justice. In federations like the United States, the concept of jurisdiction applies at multiple levels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Letter of marque</span> Governmental authorization of privateering

A letter of marque and reprisal was a government license in the Age of Sail that authorized a private person, known as a privateer or corsair, to attack and capture vessels of a foreign state at war with the issuer, licensing international military operations against a specified enemy as reprisal for a previous attack or injury. Captured naval prizes were judged before the government's admiralty court for condemnation and transfer of ownership to the privateer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Court-martial</span> Judicial action in military forces

A court-martial is a military court or a trial conducted in such a court. A court-martial is empowered to determine the guilt of members of the armed forces subject to military law, and, if the defendant is found guilty, to decide upon punishment. In addition, courts-martial may be used to try prisoners of war for war crimes. The Geneva Conventions require that POWs who are on trial for war crimes be subject to the same procedures as would be the holding military's own forces. Finally, courts-martial can be convened for other purposes, such as dealing with violations of martial law, and can involve civilian defendants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unlawful combatant</span> Person who engages in armed conflict in violation of the laws of war

An unlawful combatant, illegal combatant or unprivileged combatant/belligerent is a person who directly engages in armed conflict in violation of the laws of war and therefore is claimed not to be protected by the Geneva Conventions. The International Committee of the Red Cross points out that the terms "unlawful combatant", "illegal combatant" or "unprivileged combatant/belligerent" are not defined in any international agreements. While the concept of an unlawful combatant is included in the Third Geneva Convention, the phrase itself does not appear in the document. Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention does describe categories under which a person may be entitled to prisoner of war status. There are other international treaties that deny lawful combatant status for mercenaries and children.

An ecclesiastical court, also called court Christian or court spiritual, is any of certain courts having jurisdiction mainly in spiritual or religious matters. In the Middle Ages, these courts had much wider powers in many areas of Europe than before the development of nation states. They were experts in interpreting canon law, a basis of which was the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian, which is considered the source of the civil law legal tradition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Blockade</span> Prevention of trade or movement by force

A blockade is the act of actively preventing a country or region from receiving or sending out food, supplies, weapons, or communications, and sometimes people, by military force. A blockade differs from an embargo or sanction, which are legal barriers to trade rather than physical barriers. It is also distinct from a siege in that a blockade is usually directed at an entire country or region, rather than a fortress or city and the objective may not always be to conquer the area.

Prize money refers in particular to naval prize money, usually arising in naval warfare, but also in other circumstances. It was a monetary reward paid in accordance with the prize law of a belligerent state to the crew of a ship belonging to the state, either a warship of its navy or a privateer vessel commissioned by the state. Prize money was most frequently awarded for the capture of enemy ships or of cargoes belonging to an enemy in time of war, either arrested in port at the outbreak of war or captured during the war in international waters or other waters not the territorial waters of a neutral state. Goods carried in neutral ships that are classed as contraband, being shipped to enemy-controlled territory and liable to be useful to it for making war, were also liable to be taken as prizes, but non-contraband goods belonging to neutrals were not. Claims for the award of prize money were usually heard in a prize court, which had to adjudicate the claim and condemn the prize before any distribution of cash or goods could be made to the captors.

The federal judiciary of the United States is one of the three branches of the federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government. The U.S. federal judiciary consists primarily of the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts. It also includes a variety of other lesser federal tribunals.

Vice admiralty courts were juryless courts located in British colonies that were granted jurisdiction over local legal matters related to maritime activities, such as disputes between merchants and seamen.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">High Court of Singapore</span> Lower division of national supreme court

The High Court of Singapore is the lower division of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the upper division being the Court of Appeal. The High Court consists of the chief justice and the judges of the High Court. Judicial Commissioners are often appointed to assist with the Court's caseload. There are two specialist commercial courts, the Admiralty Court and the Intellectual Property Court, and a number of judges are designated to hear arbitration-related matters. In 2015, the Singapore International Commercial Court was established as part of the Supreme Court of Singapore, and is a division of the High Court. The other divisions of the high court are the General Division, the Appellate Division, and the Family Division. The seat of the High Court is the Supreme Court Building.

Prize Cases, 67 U.S. 635 (1863), was a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1862 during the American Civil War. The Supreme Court's decision declared the blockade of the Southern ports ordered by President Abraham Lincoln constitutional. The opinion in the case was written by Supreme Court Justice Robert Cooper Grier.

Hostis humani generis is a legal term of art that originates in admiralty law. Before the adoption of public international law, pirates and slavers were generally held to be beyond legal protection and so could be dealt with by any nation, even one that had not been directly attacked.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prize (law)</span> Vessel, cargo, or equipment captured during armed conflict on the seas

In admiralty law prizes are equipment, vehicles, vessels, and cargo captured during armed conflict. The most common use of prize in this sense is the capture of an enemy ship and its cargo as a prize of war. In the past, the capturing force would commonly be allotted a share of the worth of the captured prize. Nations often granted letters of marque that would entitle private parties to capture enemy property, usually ships. Once the ship was secured on friendly territory, it would be made the subject of a prize case: an in rem proceeding in which the court determined the status of the condemned property and the manner in which the property was to be disposed of.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Confiscation Act of 1861</span> Act of US Congress to seize property used in support of Confederate efforts

The Confiscation Act of 1861 was an act of Congress during the early months of the American Civil War permitting military confiscation and subsequent court proceedings for any property being used to support the Confederate independence effort, including slaves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military Commissions Act of 2006</span> Former United States law

The Military Commissions Act of 2006, also known as HR-6166, was an Act of Congress signed by President George W. Bush on October 17, 2006. The Act's stated purpose was "to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes".

ThePaquete Habana; The Lola, 175 U.S. 677 (1900), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court concerning the applicability and recognition of international law by the United States. The Court held that the capture of fishing vessels as prizes of war violated customary international law, which is integrated with U.S. law and binding as such. Paquete Habana influenced subsequent court decisions that incorporated international law regarding other matters. The case is also notable for citing a wide breadth of historical and international sources, including jurists from around the world and foreign state practices going back centuries.

Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the Alien Tort Statute and the Federal Tort Claims Act. Many ATS claims were filed after the Second Circuit ruling in Filártiga v. Peña-Irala created a new common law cause of action for torture under the ATS: "For purposes of civil liability, the torturer has become—like the pirate and slave trader before him—hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind." The Court in Sosa does not find there is a similar cause of action for arbitrary arrest and detention. They wrote that finding new common law causes of action based on international norms would require "a substantial element of discretionary judgment", and explain that the role of common law has changed since ATS was enacted meaning the Court will "look for legislative guidance before exercising innovative authority over substantive law".

Many legal assessments of the Gaza flotilla raid were published subsequent to the event. International law experts differed over the legality of the action by Israel. The force necessary to respond to violent resistance and whether the force that was used was proportionate were disputed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">An Act for prohibiting Trade with the Barbadoes, Virginia, Bermuda and Antego</span> English Commonwealth legislation

An Act for prohibiting Trade with the Barbadoes, Virginia, Bermuda and Antego or Act prohibiting Commerce and Trade with the Barbodoes, Antigo, Virginia, and Bermudas alias Summer's Islands was an Act of law passed by the Rump Parliament of England during the Interregnum against English colonies which sided with the Crown in the English Civil War.

References

  1. Farrant, James (2014). "Modern Maritime Neutrality Law". International Law Studies. 90. US Naval War College: 243–245.