B-178546, MAY 14, 1974

B-178546: May 14, 1974

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Shirley Jones
(202) 512-8156
jonessa@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

WHILE AN OCEAN CARRIER CLAIMING THAT 49 U.S.C. 66 DOES NOT APPLY TO IT IS GENERALLY CORRECT. WHEN THE OCEAN CARRIER HAS ISSUED JOINT TENDER WITH A MOTOR CARRIER AND THE MOTOR CARRIER IS SUBJECT TO 3-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS UNDER 49 U.S.C. 66 AND THAT PERIOD HAS EXPIRED. THE OCEAN CARRIER'S CLAIM FOR THE APPLICABLE TRANSPORTATION CHARGES IS BARRED. (HEREINAFTER GULF-PUERTO RICO) FOR TRANSPORTATION CHARGES ON NINE SHIPMENTS WAS NEVERTHELESS BARRED BECAUSE IT WAS NOT RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE WITHIN 3 YEARS OF THE DATES OF DELIVERY OF THE SHIPMENTS AS PROVIDED IN 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970). SEA-LAND NOW SUGGESTS THAT THE TIME BAR ON RECEIPT OF CLAIMS BY THIS OFFICE CONTAINED IN 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970) DID NOT APPLY TO ITS SUBSIDIARY GULF-PUERTO RICO BECAUSE GULF-PUERTO RICO WAS SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION.

B-178546, MAY 14, 1974

WHILE AN OCEAN CARRIER CLAIMING THAT 49 U.S.C. 66 DOES NOT APPLY TO IT IS GENERALLY CORRECT, WHEN THE OCEAN CARRIER HAS ISSUED JOINT TENDER WITH A MOTOR CARRIER AND THE MOTOR CARRIER IS SUBJECT TO 3-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS UNDER 49 U.S.C. 66 AND THAT PERIOD HAS EXPIRED, THE OCEAN CARRIER'S CLAIM FOR THE APPLICABLE TRANSPORTATION CHARGES IS BARRED.

TO SEA-LAND SERVICE, INC.:

SEA-LAND SERVICE, INC., BY LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 1974, REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF JUNE 14, 1973. IN THAT DECISION, WE HELD THAT DESPITE EVIDENCE OF DELAYED HANDLING BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, A CLAIM OF GULF-PUERTO RICO LINES, INC. (HEREINAFTER GULF-PUERTO RICO) FOR TRANSPORTATION CHARGES ON NINE SHIPMENTS WAS NEVERTHELESS BARRED BECAUSE IT WAS NOT RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE WITHIN 3 YEARS OF THE DATES OF DELIVERY OF THE SHIPMENTS AS PROVIDED IN 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970).

SEA-LAND NOW SUGGESTS THAT THE TIME BAR ON RECEIPT OF CLAIMS BY THIS OFFICE CONTAINED IN 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970) DID NOT APPLY TO ITS SUBSIDIARY GULF-PUERTO RICO BECAUSE GULF-PUERTO RICO WAS SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION. FOR 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970) TO APPLY, A CARRIER MUST BE SUBJECT TO THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT OR THE CIVIL AERONAUTICS ACT OF 1938 (NOW FEDERAL AVIATION ACT OF 1958).

THE SHIPMENTS IN DISPUTE MOVED FROM HATILLO, PUERTO RICO, TO BYNUM, ALABAMA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING, WERE DELIVERED IN SEPTEMBER 1969 AND WERE GOVERNED BY A JOINT TENDER OF RATES ISSUED BY GULF-PUERTO RICO AND VICTORY FREIGHT LINES, THE LATTER BEING A MOTOR CARRIER SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION. AS A RESULT OF THE LOSS OF THE ORIGINAL BILLS OF LADING, CERTIFICATES IN LIEU OF LOST U.S. GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING WERE ISSUED IN AUGUST 1972. THE CLAIM OF GULF-PUERTO RICO, TO WHOM ALL CHARGES WERE WAIVED, WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THIS OFFICE UNTIL DECEMBER 4, 1972, MORE THAN 3 YEARS AFTER DELIVERY OF THE SHIPMENTS.

UNDER 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970), CLAIMS FOR TRANSPORTATION SERVICES PERFORMED BY CARRIERS SUBJECT TO THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT OR THE FEDERAL AVIATION ACT OF 1958 ARE BARRED UNLESS RECEIVED BY THIS OFFICE WITHIN 3 YEARS OF THE ACCRUAL OF THE CLAIM. VICTORY FREIGHT LINES IS SUBJECT TO 49 U.S.C. 66 BUT GULF-PUERTO RICO, AN OCEAN CARRIER, IS NOT.

IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT A SINGLE CAUSE OF ACTION OR AN ENTIRE CLAIM BASED ON A CONTRACT CANNOT BE SPLIT OR DIVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING SEPARATE SUITS ON THE VARIOUS INDIVIDUAL PARTS, NOR CAN A PARTY DIVIDE THE GROUNDS OF RECOVERY AND MAINTAIN SUCCESSIVE ACTIONS FOR THE CAUSE OF ACTION THEREON. VON DER AHE VAN LINES, INC. V. UNITED STATES, 358 F.2D 999, 1001 (CT. CL. 1966), AND CASES CITED THEREIN.

BY FILING A JOINT TENDER WITH A CARRIER SUBJECT TO 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970), GULF-PUERTO RICO IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE SUBJECTED ITSELF TO THE PROVISIONS OF 49 U.S.C. 66 (1970). GULF-PUERTO RICO AND VICTORY FREIGHT LINES CANNOT, BY THEIR OWN ACTION OF FILING A JOINT TENDER, BE PERMITTED TO CIRCUMVENT THE STATUTE.

WE FIND NO REASON TO MODIFY OUR DECISION OF JUNE 14, 1973, AND IT IS AFFIRMED.

Oct 23, 2020

Oct 22, 2020

Oct 20, 2020

Oct 16, 2020

Oct 15, 2020

Oct 14, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here