A group of Hanjin Shipping creditors have appealed a US judge’s order allowing the bankrupt South Korean ship operator’s vessels to sail free without threat of arrest in the US.

The lawyers are asking a US District Court in New Jersey to reverse a decision by Bankruptcy Judge John Sherwood forbidding vessel arrests by bunkers suppliers and other creditors asserting maritime liens against Hanjin’s chartered ships.

Sherwood denied the request by Glencore, OceanConnect and others for “adequate protection” of their lien claims against the ships, which the lawyers argued gives them the power to arrest the vessels.

Reconsideration denied

Then yesterday, Sherwood rejected their motion to reconsider his decision, in which bunkers supplier World Fuel Services also sought protection for its claims. The judge had previously ordered vessels to stay in US waters until he made a decision on the maritime lien claims.

The appeal was filed by lawyers at Simms Showers and Wasserman, Jurista & Stoltz.

TradeWinds reported in its weekly edition that maritime lawyers widely predicted that Sherwood would reject the effort.

But the appeal shows the battle over Hanjin’s chartered ships will continue.

Seize chartered ships?

The bunkers suppliers, tug owners and other service providers have argued that they should be able to seize vessels that Hanjin doesn’t own, arguing that the Hanjin’s Chapter 15 bankruptcy in Newark, New Jersey, only covers the South Korean company’s property.

Cargo interests, meanwhile, have pushed for legal protections that ensure that they can regain control of containers that have been stranded in Hanjin vessels and stuck at US ports.

Several logistics companies have now filed papers in the US Bankruptcy Court asking that Sherwood ensure that their contracts with Hanjin are protected by his orders in the same way that cargo owners are.

They asked to the judge to ensure that any payments they make to third parties to secure the release of cargoes shipped through Hanjin can be credited to the amount they owe to the liner operator.

Why pay more?

And they complain that they should not have to pay more to a terminal, rail carrier or stevedore than they would have paid in their contracts with Hanjin.

“This mechanism not only enhances the rapid transportation of Hanjin’s stalled cargo, it limits Hanjin’s exposure to damages resulting from third parties making extortionate demands for their services based upon the fact that beneficial cargo owners are in desperate straits as a result of Hanjin’s insolvency proceeding,” wrote the attorneys at law firms Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland & Perretti and GKG Law.

The lawyers say non-vessel operating common carrier Carolina Ocean Lines, for example, complains that a rail carrier charged $1,781 per container for the same service that cost $1,130 as part of its contract with Hanjin.Appeal filed after judge frees Hanjin ships