A seafarer sued the manager of a vessel for labour claim. The defendant challenged the allegations on the grounds it was acting as the representative of the shipowner, and accordingly, any claim arising from the sea employment contract should be filed against the shipowner, not the manager.
The plaintiff himself had mentioned he had entered into a sea employment contract with the defendant and served on a vessel managed by the latter.
In view of the above, the court rejected the claim against the manager.
One-membered Piraeus Court of Appeal Judgment no 740/2018, Judge: Ch. Saramanti, Attorneys at law: P. Kouplidou, G. Peponis, P. Karamitsios, Maritime Law Review vol. 46, p.18.
NOTE: The distinction between manager (acting for the vessel on behalf of a third party and in its own name), shipowner (owning the vessel and exploiting simultaneously her for its own account), exploiter-efoplistis (exploiting for its own account a vessel owned by a third party), is crucial to define liabilities in the shipping industry. The manager is a representative of the party that exploits the vessel, hence it is not liable for issues related to the vessel.
