TREASURE SALVAGE OF THE SAN JOSE. A CONTEST BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS.
Phone
Call
Mobile Img
The Four Types of
Maritime Cases We Handle

ATTORNEY PROFILE

FRANK D. BUTLER is an attorney in the State of Florida for the past 22 years and is licensed in every Court in Florida, including all state and federal courts. Frank is an avid outdoor enthusiast and represents people injured in boating accidents and cruise ship injuries. You should be careful to hire an attorney who knows the issues specific to cruise ship cases and boating accidents.

I grew up in Florida and have been around the boating and marine industry my entire life. I have filed suit against all of the cruiselines that operate in Florida and have successfully handled boating cases throughout Florida. It’s what we do. Maritime law is very complex and you need to make sure that the attorney you choose has experience in handling these types of cases.

Many attorneys advertise for boating injury and cruise ship cases. See our “Very Important Information” under the Cruise Ship button and our “10 Things You Need To Know” under the Boating Accidents button. If the attorney you are considering cannot answer these questions, you should consider whether they actually handle these types of cases.
imp info img

Why would an attorney just advertise for boating or cruise cases if they do not handle them? First, an attorney can refer your case to a maritime attorney and collect a referral fee. Second, an attorney can try to handle your boating or cruise ship claim even if they have never handled one at all. At our law firm we do not handle real estate law, bankruptcy, divorces, contracts, criminal law, probate, tax matters, medical malpractice, etc.

Your consultation with us is at absolutely no charge to you. There are no fees and no costs to you unless we win your case. See our Cruise Ship button and Boating Accidents button for very important information you should know regarding your claim. Maritime law imposes shorter statutes of limitation than most state courts.


irma


Contact Mr. Butler

Serving all of Florida
Our base office is in Pinellas Park, FL

TREASURE SALVAGE OF THE SAN JOSE. A CONTEST BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS.

THE GOVERNMENTS INVOLVED IN THE TREASURE SALVAGE OF THE SAN JOSE.

We recently wrote about the find of the Spanish galleon, San Jose. In that article we wrote about the difficulties of marine salvors to claim ownership of treasure which may be discovered in such wrecks. We noted the prominent example when Odyssey Marine Exploration—headquartered in Tampa, Florida at the time—located another Spanish galleon known as the Mercedes. Odyssey filed suit in federal court in Florida in an attempt to gain ownership of the treasure they had found and retrieved, but eventually had to give up all of the estimated $500,000,000 in coins and artifacts from their recovery. We noted that Odyssey never even received back their expenses for retrieving the treasure; all of it was shipped to the government of Spain. The Odyssey case can be said to be a dispute between a private entity, Odyssey, and the Spanish government.

In the present maritime salvage case, the BBC pointed out that in the matter of the San Jose, this will be a dispute between countries as to the rightful ownership of any treasure which is excavated from the San Jose. (The original reported estimate of treasure was as high as $17 billion; however, the BBC casts doubt on that high of an estimate.) Still the potential of several billion dollars has gotten the attention of governments which could contest ownership.

The wreck of the San Jose is said to be located within the territorial waters of Colombia; however, it appears that the vessel itself was a warship owned by the government of Spain. The San Jose was said to be loaded with gold and silver “obtained” from South America—which it was transferring to Spain to help pay for its war debts. We use the word “obtained” because it is not altogether clear that the native people of South America voluntarily gave up the gold and silver. In the Odyssey case—which was also an attempted Spanish transportation of gold and silver from South America to Spain on the galleon Mercedes—the government of Peru intervened in that federal court in the dispute between Odyssey and Spain. Peru claimed that the treasure being transported was taken from Peru by the Spanish government in the 1600’s.

The case of the San Jose—and which entity is entitled to its ownership—will be decided differently than in the case of the Mercedes. In the Mercedes—which again Odyssey Marine spent considerable money retrieving that treasure off the coast of Gibraltar—the federal court in Tampa ultimately concluded that Odyssey had no legal right to have arrested (i.e., obtain jurisdiction over) an asset of the Spanish government. If Odyssey had no legal right to arrest an asset of the Spanish government, then the federal court determined that it too had no jurisdiction to preside over the case. The BBC notes that the San Jose shipwreck may end being decided with intervention by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). It is doubtful that the case will be heard in a U.S. court.

The cases of the Mercedes and the San Jose demonstrate the treacherous waters of retrieving what governments view as their heritage—or as the attorney representing Spain in the Mercedes case called it “the patronage of the Spanish Government”. The upshot is that for these types of treasure salvor cases, they will be decided on international treaties and at the international level.

Treasure Salvage Attorney

THE GOVERNMENTS INVOLVED IN THE TREASURE SALVAGE OF THE SAN JOSE.

We recently wrote about the find of the Spanish galleon, San Jose. In that article we wrote about the difficulties of marine salvors to claim ownership of treasure which may be discovered in such wrecks. We noted the prominent example when Odyssey Marine Exploration—headquartered in Tampa, Florida at the time—located another Spanish galleon known as the Mercedes. Odyssey filed suit in federal court in Florida in an attempt to gain ownership of the treasure they had found and retrieved, but eventually had to give up all of the estimated $500,000,000 in coins and artifacts from their recovery. We noted that Odyssey never even received back their expenses for retrieving the treasure; all of it was shipped to the government of Spain. The Odyssey case can be said to be a dispute between a private entity, Odyssey, and the Spanish government.

In the present maritime salvage case, the BBC pointed out that in the matter of the San Jose, this will be a dispute between countries as to the rightful ownership of any treasure which is excavated from the San Jose. (The original reported estimate of treasure was as high as $17 billion; however, the BBC casts doubt on that high of an estimate.) Still the potential of several billion dollars has gotten the attention of governments which could contest ownership.

The wreck of the San Jose is said to be located within the territorial waters of Colombia; however, it appears that the vessel itself was a warship owned by the government of Spain. The San Jose was said to be loaded with gold and silver “obtained” from South America—which it was transferring to Spain to help pay for its war debts. We use the word “obtained” because it is not altogether clear that the native people of South America voluntarily gave up the gold and silver. In the Odyssey case—which was also an attempted Spanish transportation of gold and silver from South America to Spain on the galleon Mercedes—the government of Peru intervened in that federal court in the dispute between Odyssey and Spain. Peru claimed that the treasure being transported was taken from Peru by the Spanish government in the 1600’s.

The case of the San Jose—and which entity is entitled to its ownership—will be decided differently than in the case of the Mercedes. In the Mercedes—which again Odyssey Marine spent considerable money retrieving that treasure off the coast of Gibraltar—the federal court in Tampa ultimately concluded that Odyssey had no legal right to have arrested (i.e., obtain jurisdiction over) an asset of the Spanish government. If Odyssey had no legal right to arrest an asset of the Spanish government, then the federal court determined that it too had no jurisdiction to preside over the case. The BBC notes that the San Jose shipwreck may end being decided with intervention by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). It is doubtful that the case will be heard in a U.S. court.

The cases of the Mercedes and the San Jose demonstrate the treacherous waters of retrieving what governments view as their heritage—or as the attorney representing Spain in the Mercedes case called it “the patronage of the Spanish Government”. The upshot is that for these types of treasure salvor cases, they will be decided on international treaties and at the international level.

By : First Page Attorney | June 4, 2018 | Cruise Ship Injuries