22 U.S.C. § 3771

Injuries in locks of canal; adjustment and payment of claims

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Subject to section 3779(b) of this title and to subsection (b) of this section, the Commission shall promptly adjust and pay damages for injuries to vessels, or to the cargo, crew, or passengers of vessels, which may arise by reason of their passage through the locks of the Panama Canal when the injury was proximately caused by negligence or fault on the part of an officer or employee of the United States acting within the scope of his employment and in the line of his duties in connection with the operation of the Canal. If the negligence or fault of the vessel, master, crew, or passengers proximately contributed to the injury, the award of damages shall be diminished in proportion to the negligence or fault attributable to the vessel, master, crew, or passengers. Damages may not be allowed and paid for injuries to any protrusion beyond any portion of the hull of a vessel, whether it is permanent or temporary in character. A vessel is considered to be passing through the locks of the Canal, under the control of officers or employees of the United States, from the time the first towing line is made fast on board before entrance into the locks and until the towing lines are cast off upon, or immediately prior to, departure from the lock chamber. No payment for damages on a claim may be made under this section unless the claim is filed with the Commission within one year after the date of the injury or by November 18, 1998, whichever is later.(b)(1) With respect to a claim under subsection (a) for damages for injuries to a vessel or its cargo, if, at the time the injuries were incurred, the navigation or movement of the vessel was not under the control of a Panama Canal pilot, the Commission may pay not more than $50,000 on the claim, unless the injuries were caused by another vessel under the control of a Panama Canal pilot.(2) The provisions of subsections (c) through (e) of section 3761 of this title shall apply to any claim described in paragraph (1).(Pub. L. 96–70, title I, § 1411, Sept. 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 485; Pub. L. 99–209, § 2(a), (b), Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1716; Pub. L. 100–203, title V, § 5417(b), Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–271; Pub. L. 105–85, div. C, title XXXV, § 3543(a), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 2072; Pub. L. 105–261, div. C, title XXXV, §§ 3509(a)(1), 3512(a)(4), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2269, 2271.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1998—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105–261 inserted “to section 3779(b) of this title and” after “Subject” in first sentence and substituted “by November 18, 1998” for “November 18, 1997”.

1997—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105–85 substituted “within one year after the date of the injury or November 18, 1997,” for “within 2 years after the date of the injury, or within 1 year after December 23, 1985,”.

1987—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 100–203 substituted “pay not more than $50,000 on the claim” for “adjust and pay the claim only if the amount of the claim does not exceed $50,000”.

1985—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 99–209, § 2(a), designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), substituted “Subject to subsection (b) of this section, the” for “The”, substituted “the Panama Canal when the injury was proximately caused by negligence or fault on the part of an officer or employee of the United States acting within the scope of his employment and in the line of his duties in connection with the operation of the Canal” for “The Panama Canal under the control of officers or employees of the United States”, struck out provision that damages could not be paid where the injury was proximately caused by the negligence or fault of the vessel, master, crew, or passengers, and inserted provision that no payment for damages on a claim may be made under this section unless the claim is filed with the Commission within 2 years after the date of the injury, or within 1 year after Dec. 23, 1985, whichever is later.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–209, § 2(b), added subsec. (b).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1985 Amendment

Pub. L. 99–209, § 7, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1718, provided that:“(a)Retroactive Applicability.—The amendments made by subsections (a) and (c) of section 2 [amending this section and section 3772 of this title], and the amendments made by sections 4 and 5 of this Act [amending sections 3775 and 3776 of this title], shall apply to any claim arising on or after October 1, 1979.“(b)Future Applicability.—“(1)Sections 3 and 6.—The amendments made by sections 3 [amending section 3774 of this title] and 6 [enacting section 3779 of this title] of this Act shall apply to any claim arising on or after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 1985].“(2)Section 2(b).—The amendment made by subsection (b) of section 2 [amending this section] shall apply to any claim arising from an incident occurring on or after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 1985].”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1980–2006 · leading case: Donna McClain Mother and Personal Representative of the Deceased Minor, Ramon John Rasimowicz v. Panama Canal Commission

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Donna McClain Mother and Personal Representative of the Deceased Minor, Ramon John Rasimowicz v. Panama Canal Commission (1988) ca5 · cites it 4× “” Like the Panama Canal Company, the Commission is liable for claims arising from in-lock vessel accidents, 22 U.S.C. § 3771 , and out-of-lock vessel accidents, 22 U.”

Asociacion De Empleados Del Area Canalera v. Panama Canal Commission (2006) ca11 “§ 3776 specifies that claims for damages under 22 U.S.C. § 3771 (a) or 3772 (which pertain to claims for injuries in the navigation of the canal) may be brought against the Commission solely in the Eastern District of Louisiana.”

Arrocha v. Panama Canal Commission (1985) nyed “The Robles court noted that fact and added: Congress also provided for creation of the Panama Canal Employment System, to be based on the consideration of the merit of each employee and the qualifications and fitness of the employee to hold his position.”

De Berrio v. United States (1980) canalzoned “22 U.S.C. §§ 3771 , 3776. 15 . In those rare instances where the plaintiff resides within another judicial district, suit could also be filed in that district.”

Seguros Sucre S.A. v. Panama Canal Commission (2001) laed · cites it 4× “(“Galatours”), the owners of the vessel and the insurance policy issued by plaintiff Seguros Sucre, filed an administrative claim for damages with the defendant Panama Canal Commission (“PCC”), pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 3771 (a). The PCC denied Galatours’s claim on May 11, 2000,…”

Husted v. United States (1985) flsd “Aside from a waiver of immunity regarding accidents occurring in the locks of the Canal, 22 U.S.C. § 3771 , the Act’s only exception is that it allows the Commission to settle claims for under $50,-000.”

Washington Tanker Co. v. Panama Canal Commission (1985) laed · cites it 2× “22 U.S.C. § 3771 (1982). The Commission argues that, because the plaintiff’s claim is created by statute, the claim is precluded by the three year limitation period set forth in the Canal Zone Code.”

Sun Line Greece Special Shipping Co. v. Panama Canal Commission (1984) laed “Since the Commission has failed to prove that any fault on the part of the SOLARIS, her master, crew or passengers proximately contributed to the accident, the Commission is strictly liable for the full amount of damages.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.