CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co. | |
---|---|
Argued November 5, 2019 Decided March 30, 2020 | |
Full case name | CITGO Asphalt Refining Company, et al., Petitioners v. Frescati Shipping Company, Ltd., et al. |
Docket no. | 18-565 |
Citations | 589 U.S. ___ (more) 140 S. Ct. 1081; 206 L. Ed. 2d 391 |
Case history | |
Prior |
|
Holding | |
The plain language of the parties' safe-berth clause establishes a warranty of safety. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Sotomayor, joined by Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh |
Dissent | Thomas, joined by Alito |
CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co., 589 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the responsibility of costs of cleanup resulting from a 2004 oil spill on the Delaware River near Paulsboro, New Jersey from the result of a hull rupture. The ship's owner, the Frescati Shipping Company, was responsible for the costs of the cleanup, coming to more than US$143 million, but under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, believed that Citgo, who had ordered the shipment, bore responsibly for the shipping route through shallow waters that led to the spill. After years of litigation, the Supreme Court ruled in its 7–2 decision that the contract language established between Citgo and Frescati established that Citgo would provide safe berth for the vessel, and thus ultimately responsible for the spill.[1]