Joint Motion for Approval and Confidential Treatment of Settlement Agreement and Release - Federal Maritime Commission Docket 22-33

Oct 3, 2026

Upload by Angel

Joint motion filed by CCMA, LLC and Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. and its U.S. agent seeking Federal Maritime Commission approval for a confidential settlement agreement and release submitted under seal. The parties argue FMC policy strongly encourages settlements, and that the agreement reflects careful consideration of litigation strengths versus risks and costs. The filing recites the proceeding’s background, including allegations under the Shipping Act and related regulations, procedural scheduling, and discovery, followed by settlement negotiations.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages6

Reading Time15 min

AccessFree to download

Joint Motion for Approval and Confidential Treatment

Introduction

The Confidential Settlement Agreement Should Be Approved

Request for Confidential Treatment and Leave to File Under Seal

BEFORE THE FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION | DOCKET NO. 22-33 | | --- | | CCMA, LLC,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY S.A. and
MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY (USA) INC. as agent for Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A.
RESPONDENTS. | JOINT MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE Complainant CCMA, LLC, (“Complainant”) and Respondent, MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY S.A., and MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY (USA) INC., AS AGENT FOR MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY S.A. (“Respondents”) (referred to jointly as the “Parties”) submit this joint motion in support of the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release filed under seal concurrently herewith. The Parties believe that the Confidential Settlement Agreement meets the criteria set by the Federal Maritime Commission (“FMC” or “Commission”) for the approval of settlement agreements and therefore should be approved. I. INTRODUCTION This proceeding was commenced when Complainant filed a complaint on December 5, 2022, alleging that Respondents had violated sections 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) of the Shipping Act of 1984 and 46 C.F.R. §§ 545.4 and 545.5 by allegedly failing to establish, observe, and enforce just and reasonable practices relating to receiving, handling, storing, and delivering the property of CCMA. Complainant sought reparations for injuries allegedly caused by Respondents’ conduct. The Parties established a procedural schedule and engaged in discovery. The Parties have engaged in settlement discussions and have reached agreement on a settlement embodied in the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release filed in connection with the Motion for Approval. II. THE CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SHOULD BE APPROVED “The Commission has a strong and consistent policy of”'encourag[ing] settlements and engag[ing] in every presumption which favors a finding that they are fair, correct, and valid.”Aeneas Exporting LLC v. Carlo Shipping Intl, Inc. , Docket No. 20-11, 2020 FMC LEXIS 189, at *2, 2020 WL 5942148, at *2 (Fed. Mar. Comm'n Aug. 24, 2020) (Wirth, C.J.) (quoting Inlet Fish Producers, Inc. v. Sea-Land Serv., Inc., 29 S.R.R. 975, 978 (ALJ 2002)) . “[I]fit is the considered judgment of the parties that whatever benefits might result from vindication of their positions would be outweighed by the costs of continued litigation and if the settlement otherwise complies with law the Commission authorizes the settlement.” Delhi Petroleum Pty. Ltd. v. US. Atl. & Gulf/Australia-New Zealand Conf. and Columbus Line, Inc., Docket Nos. 88-2, 88-4, 1988 FMCLEXIS 25, at *19, 24 S.R.R. 1129, 1134 (All Aug. 12, 1988)) . “Reaching a settlement allows the parties to settle their differences, without an admission of a violation of law by the respondent, when both the complainant and respondent have decided that it would be much cheaper to settle on such terms than to seek to prevail after expensive litigation.” Mac Indus., Inc. d/b/a Mac Container Line v. COSCO Shipping Lines Co., Ltd., Docket No. 20-09, 2020 FMC LEXIS 181, at *3, 2020 WL 4464298, at *2 (Fed. Mar. Comm'n July 29, 2020) (Wirth, C.J.) (quoting APM Terminals NAm., Inc. v. Port Auth. of N. Y. and N.J., 31 S.R.R. 623, 626 (FMC 2009)) . The Commission’s policies, its Rules of Practice, and the Administrative Procedures Act all encourage settlements. As the ALJ recognized in Old Ben Coal Co. v. Sea-Land Services, Inc., 18 S.R.R. 1085, 1091 (ALJ 1978): The desire to uphold compromises and settlements is based upon various advantages which they have over litigation. The resolution of controversies by means of compromise and settlement is generally faster and less expensive than litigation; it results in a saving of time for the Parties, the lawyers, and the courts, and it is thus advantageous to judicial administration, and, in turn to government asa whole. Moreover, the use of compromise and settlement is conducive to amicable and peaceful relations be

FAQs

What relief does the joint motion request from the FMC?

Approval of the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release, and dismissal of the complaint with prejudice based on that approval.

Why do the parties believe the Confidential Settlement Agreement should be approved?

They contend it satisfies FMC criteria because the FMC has a strong, consistent policy encouraging settlements, and the agreement is fair, reasonable, and not contrary to law or public policy.

What issues does the motion address procedurally before the settlement?

The motion describes the complaint filing date, the alleged regulatory violations, the establishment of a procedural schedule, discovery, and subsequent settlement discussions leading to the confidential agreement.

Oct 3, 2026

Upload by Angel