The Port of Tacoma, a Municipal Corporation v. S.S. Duval, Formerly S.S. Mount Rainier, Etc.

This case presents a conflict between a claim of lien by the Port of Tacoma and a “no lien” clause in a charter party. There is no dispute as to the facts. The court rendered a summary judgment in favor of the ship owner and the Port appeals. We affirm.

The lien claim arises under a tariff establishing charges for wharfage and cargo handling services, which also contains the language set out in the margin. The services were rendered to the S.S. Duval at a time when she was under bareboat charter containing a no lien clause. The Port of Tacoma did not know of these provisions; it made no inquiry; it simply relied upon the tariff.

Coneededly, but for the tariff, the liens would not be valid, 46 U.S.C. § 973 ; Gilmore & Black, The Law of Admiralty § 9-46, at 566-68 (1957). See Dampskibsselskabet Dannebrog v. Signal Oil & Gas Co., 1940, 310 U.S. 268, 275 , 60 S.Ct. 937 , 84 L.Ed. 1197 ; United States v. Carver, 1923, 260 U.S. 482 , 43 S.Ct. 181 , 67 L.Ed. 361 ; Colonial Beach Co. v. Quemahoning Coal Co., 1923, 260 U.S. 707 , 43 S.Ct. 246 , 67 L.Ed. 474 . The Port says that the. tariff gave constructive notice to the owner and makes the no lien provisions of the charter ineffective…