I can't get over the arrogance of U.S. courts ruling over international waters. Royal Mail ships were contracted by the British mail. No one should be able to rule over int'l waters, but if anyone should rule over the RMS Titanic's remains, it should be the Brits.
Well, exactly....
As we have seen, there is flagrant abuse of Admiralty Law with shipwrecks by a few publicly trading treasure hunting companies...especially under Law of Salvage...but also under the Law of Finds...
No aid is necessary for a vessel that sank years ago...all of the BS excuses, such as danger from trawling have existed for 100's of years, yet, it is still there.
Several shipwrecks in the Med brought to Florida Courts...by BS "in rem" filings under the Law of Salvage.
The Law of Finds is also misappropriated claiming vast areas of the ocean bottom. The Law of Finds is what you have found, not an area of the Ocean bottom where one lays claim to what "may" be found. Under the Law of Finds, you claim what you have in possession, ie physically recovered...NOT what you may find claiming a vast area of Ocean bottom. Its very simple, I found this, and ask for a claim under finds...you do NOT get to claim what you have not brought to the Court to adjudicate! SIMPLE!
On shipwrecks, for the Courts....It should be the Country of origin of the vessel, or Country of ownership of the company that owns the vessel. That is where you file a claim. The Law of Finds or the Law of Salvage is a claim against the owner....using the finds as the basis....
There is significant case law, under the Law of Finds, where a salvor has claimed a wreck site, and a 5 nm radius about a point, yet the Appellate Court has denied the claim, and only given the salvor what was recovered ...
In reality, this is why little attention is given to an claim under the Law of Finds, nor an Admiralty claim.
